Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

Oral Answers to Questions — RUSSIA.

INTER-ALLIED MISSIONS.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: 1.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if all the Allied Military Missions in the Baltic States have now been placed under the supreme direction of a French officer; why General Marsh has been recalled.; and whether any change of policy in that part of Europe is in contemplation?

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Churchill): I have been asked to reply. The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The object of the Inter-Allied Mission in the Baltic, of which General Niessel is Chief, is to enforce the evacuation of German troops from Latvia and Lithuania. General Marsh has been recalled and his services dispensed with, as the British Representative on the Inter-Allied Commission is able to perform the duties of Chief of the British Military Mission in the Baltic in addition to his duties with General Niessel. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: Is this French officer the senior Allied representative in the Baltic?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Yes.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: 5.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state the progress made in the negotiations for an armistice, or for peace, between the Governments of the Baltic Provinces and the Soviet Government of Russia.; whether the Polish, Ukranian. and Finnish Governments, or de facto Governments, are taking any part in the negotiations; and whether the
Governments of the Baltic Provinces are still left complete freedom of action by the Allies in these negotiations?

Mr. HARMSWORTH: According to the latest information which has been received from the Baltic, no decision has yet been reached in the negotiations now proceeding at Dorpat. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative, and to the third part in the affirmative.

Mr. SWAN: 36.
asked whether the British military mission in South Russia, or any part of it, is or has been engaged in military operations against the Soviet Russian forces?

Mr. CHURCHILL: A few individual officers in the Royal Air Force and Tank Corps have voluntarily taken part in the fighting against the Bolsheviks. Otherwise the duties of the Mission are confined to advise and supervision in the distribution and use of British materials.

Mr. SWAN: Are we responsible for the payment of these officers?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Certainly.

Mr. SHORT: Those who are making these attacks?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Yes.

Mr. SHORT: Will the right hon. Gentleman give instructions for these men not to be so employed in the future in view of the statement made by the Prime Minister?

Brigadier-General CROFT: Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that question will he see, in view of the fact that the remainder of the Allies have left detachments there, that we do not alter in any way the very small number we have there?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I will not restrict in any way the praiseworthy and gallant. activities of those officers.

Captain W. BENN: Are these officers employing our tanks in warfare?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I said that a certain number of these officers who have trained the Russian personnel of the tanks we sent to South Russia, and they have gone into action with those tanks. They have carried their instruction to that extent.

Mr. SHORT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this conduct is a violation
of the statement made, by the Prime MinisterMdash;that we as a country were not intervening in Russian affairs?

Mr. CHURCHILL: It is no violation. On the contrary, the Prime Minister has repeatedly affirmed our intention to continue these Missions for a certain period to afford such assistance to the forces of General Denikin as it is in their power to give, and which our resources enable us to give, and there is not the slightest intention to limit them in any way.

ALLIED TROOPS.

Mr. ALFRED SHORT: 17.
asked in which areas of Russian territory, if any, Allied troops are being employed, the numbers so employed, and which of our Allies are involved?

Mr. CHURCHILL: As the House is aware the only British troops employed in the territories of the former Russian Empire, apart from Missions, are those garrisoning the Port of Batum. The principal Allied forces in Russia are the American and Japanese contingents in Siberia, but there are also detachments of French, Italians, Poles, Czecho-Slovaks and Serbs. Without the consent of our Allies, I do not feel at liberty to disclose their numbers, but in the case of the Japanese they are considerable and increasing.

EXCHANGE OF PRISONERS.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether. he can send urgent instructions to the hon. Member for South-East Leeds to demand, as a preliminary in the negotiations (which he stated were likely to be protracted for at least six weeks) for the exchange of prisoners with the Bolsheviks, that British prisoners be treated with some humanity; whether he is aware that naval prisoners captured at the attack on Bolshevik battleships have now been moved to Moscow, where the conditions are really terrible: cold (zero Centigrade inside, 10 degrees below outside), no blankets, no mattresses, nothing but ¾lb. black bread and hot tea without milk or sugar, and nothing but the clothes they have on; that they are all slightly wounded, and their wounds will not heal under these conditions; that the conditions under which they are suffering cannot be exaggerated, and if exchange is delayed it will be death to a large
number; and that the exchange must be for all British in Russia, not only for military prisoners?

Mr. BONAR LAW (Leader of the House): In reply to the hon. Member's question, I can assure him that the hon. Member for Leeds has already been instructed to take such steps as are practicable to ensure the welfare of the British prisoners in Russia As far as I am aware the naval prisoners to whom the hon. Member has referred are at the Androniev Monastery. In view, however, of the cold weather which has now set in, and the lack of heating and food (even though M. Litvinoff affirms that the rations of the prisoners are already superior to those of the Red Army), the conditions in which they live must be deplorable. M. Litvinoff states that before leaving Russia he visited the places where the prisoners live, and saw some of their representatives. They were all well in health, excepting in so far as some of the wounded needed special surgical attendance.

Mr. E. WOOD: Will the right hon. Gentleman be able to make any statement about the Mission of the hon. Member for South-East Leeds before the Adjournment?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I cannot tell, but the answer I have given shows that the Government realise the terrible hardships of these men, and will certainly do everything in their power to put an end to them.

Mr. W. THORNE: Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to state when the hon. Member for South-East Leeds will be back home again?

Mr. BONAR LAW: No. The negotiations are still proceeding.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the statements in the question are taken from a letter from one of the prisoners who himself, although, a military prisoner, presses for the exchange of all prisoners?

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is making a statement. He is not entitled to do that.

ESTHONIAN GOVERNMENT.

Lieut.-Colonel MALONE: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is
aware of the further Note handed by the Allied representatives to the Esthonian Government on the 28th November asking for assistance to reorganise the defeated Yudenitch Army by means of troops from the German Army under Colonel Bermondt; if this request was initiated with the concurrence of His Majesty's Government; and, if not, will he take the opportunity of disassociating His Majesty's Government from these proposals?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I have made inquiries and am informed that no Note was handed by the Allied Representative to the Esthonian Government on the 28th November At a later date a proposal was put before the Esthonian Government to allow those Russians amongst Bermondt's force who were prepared to renounce the Germans and were considered to be loyal to the Russian cause, to join General Yudenitch's Army. The situation was one which had to be handled without incurring the delay necessarily imposed by reference to London, and, had events rendered the execution of this proposal possible, I can see no objection to it.

Oral Answers to Questions — BAVARIA.

GERMAN SOCIALISTS IN PRISON.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 2.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information to the effect that the Socialists Herren Schneller and Toller are in prison in Bavaria; and whether, in view of the recent action of Sir George Clerk in Budapest in successfully demanding the release of Socialists imprisoned there, any action is contemplated in these analogous cases?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Cecil Harmsworth): My information about Schneller is that as Commissary of Finance in the Bavarian Soviet Government he attempted to confiscate the deposits in the banks and plate and other valuables lying there. From Press reports it appears that he is in prison in consequence. My information about Toller is that after the Armistice he started a revolutionary students' club at Heidelberg. During the Spartacist Revolution of last April he became head of the
Council of Workmen and Soldiers at Munich, and ultimately chief of the socalled Red Guard. For this he was sentenced to several years' detention in a fortress. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: Were not similar charges made against the Socialists imprisoned at Buda-Pesth; and if we can try officers in Buda-Pesth, why cannot we try these men, in view of the fact that we are considerably controlling German politics at the present time?

Mr. HARMSWORTH: Well, Sir, I have no information in regard to the first part of the supplementary question. In regard to the second, I do not think it is incumbent on the part of His Majesty's Government to take the action suggested.

Oral Answers to Questions — CENTRAL EUROPE.

RELIEF MEASURES.

Major GLYN: 7.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state what is the last Report received from His Majesty's representative at Vienna regarding the economic situation in Austria; whether the reports of large numbers of women and children dying of starvation are confirmed by these dispatches; and whether there is anything to prevent His Majesty's Government, upon lines already suggested, instructing the British special commissioner on his arrival in Southern Russia to get in touch with the central union of Russian co-operative societies, which are the sole organisations in touch with the agricultural classes, with a view to arranging the exchange of manufactured goods for wheat which could be shipped to Central Europe by the Danube?

Mr. HARMSWORTH: As regards the first part of the question, it is intended to lay Papers on the economic situation in Austria as soon as possible. The latest dispatches from His Majesty's representative at Vienna and other reports indicate that the food situation in Austria is critical. As regards the last part of the question, British representatives are in touch with the South Russian co-operative societies, but it has not been found practicable to make any arrangement of the kind indicated. His Majesty's Government are doing everything within their limited
resources to relieve a situation which calls for the co-operation not only of His Majesty's Government, but of the Allied, Associated, and other Powers.

Major GLYN: Is it true that all the food supplies in Austria will come to an end on:31st January? What steps will be taken?

Mr. HARMSWORTH: Arrangements have been made which, I think, will deal with the situation until the end of January; after that the prospect is extremely doubtful.

Major GLYN: Is it true that there will be no food whatever after 31st January?

Mr. HARMSWORTH: Unless further arrangements are made, I think it will be true to say that.

Captain W. BENN: 49.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether hospitals have been closed in Vienna owing to lack of the necessary supplies: and, if so, whether the Government is taking any steps to assist in their relief?

Mr. BONAR LAW: The hospital situation in Vienna is undoubtedly serious, and medical work has been and is still being hampered by shortage of supplies, but no reports are to hand to show that hospitals have actually been closed. The coal shortage has interfered with the supply of hot water necessary for sterilisation, whilst there has been a shortage of linen required for surgical purposes. Moreover, the shortage of milk and other invalid foodstuffs has been felt severely.
Efforts to mitigate this situation have been made by the Allied and Associated Governments, and by voluntary societies in this country, assisted by the —1 for —1 grant, but the question cannot be fundamentally dealt with apart from the whole question of credits for the supply of coal and foodstuffs to Austria from neighbouring countries and overseas, and this matter is now receiving the urgent consideration of the Government and of the representatives in Paris of the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Italy.
Apart from the help is being afforded by the Italian Government in railing up foodstuffs from Trieste, and caring for a number of Viennese children, the British Government have granted a credit of —25,000 for the provision of coal from the United Kingdom for Vienna, and
arrangements are now being made to ship up to 1,000 tons of fats from the United Kingdom to Vienna.

Sir J. D. REES: Is it suggested that the British taxpayer should put down —I for every —I subscribed by voluntary agencies for hospitals in Vienna?

Mr. SONAR LAW: There must he a limit to what we do. I should be greatly surprised if the country does not approve of the efforts we are making to help these hospitals.

Mr. BILLING: Is there any limit to the amount the Government is going to cover, or is it unlimited?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I think a limit was set upon it, but in any case I am afraid a limit will be set by the amount of the voluntary contributions.

Oral Answers to Questions — ARMISTICE CONDITIONS.

GUNS AND AIRCRAFT HANDED OVBIE BY GERMANY.

Brigadier - General CROFT: 10.
asked what is the total number of guns and aircraft which has been handed over by Germany in accordance with the conditions of the Armistice; and how do these figures, compare with the numbers laid down?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The total numbers of guns and aircraft which have been handed over by Germany in accordance with the terms of the Armistice are as follows:


5,000
guns,


25,000
machine guns,


3,000
trench mortars.


1,700
aeroplanes.

These figures are the numbers laid down.

Sir J. BUTCHER: Are the guns of proper quality, and useful—not worn out?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I believe they are.

Brigadier - General CROFT: 11.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether all the rolling-stock agreed to be handed over by Germany at the time of the Armistice has now been received; and whether the total munitions of war under the Armistice have also been handed over?

Mr. CHURCHILL: There is an undeliverable deficiency of forty-two locomotives and 4,460 wagons remaining to be
delivered by the Germans under Clause VII. of the Armistice Convention. The munitions of war demanded under the terms of the Armistice have been handed over.

Mr. PEMBERTON BILLING: What steps are being taken to obtain these wagons in view of the shortage in this country?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I do not think these wagons are suitable for British railways; they are a different gauge. The Germans have already delivered an overwhelming portion of the railway material arranged for.

Brigadier-General CROFT: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the question, No German toys until the German engines have been handed over?

Mr. CHURCHILL: No; I do not take that view. I think the Germans have made a tremendous effort to comply with the severe conditions imposed upon them.

Oral Answers to Questions — NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.

WAR SERVICE GRATUITIES.

Captain HACKING: 13.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the difficulty experienced by demobilised soldiers or their dependants in correctly interpreting the amount of war service gratuity to which they are entitled under the December, 1918 Army Order and the consequent frequent requests for an explanation, he will issue instructions that, on each form sent out to a soldier or dependant on which is intimated the net sum due on account of war gratuities, the amount already credited to the soldier's account under Articles 1117 and 1118 of the Royal Warrant will also be stated?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Yes, Sir; I have given instructions that this shall be done.

EX-SERVICE MEN (GRANTS).

Mr. DOYLE: 28.
asked the Secretary for War if his attention has been drawn to the dissatisfaction amongst ex-Service men as to the inadequacy of the grant when compared with that allowed to the soldiers of the great Dominions; and if he can hold out any hope that the scale will be revised in the shape of more generous help to demobilised unemployed soldiers?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The grants of both war gratuity and of unemployed donation have been very fully considered by His Majesty's Government, and I can hold out no hope of an increased scale.

SCOTTISH RIFLES (LIEUTENANT W. M. SNOWDEN).

Mr. N. MACLEAN: 38.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Lieut. W. M. Snowden, 2nd Battalion Scottish Rifles, who has served twenty-one years 309 days, and was promoted on the field, has received no money from the Government since his demobilisation on 24th October, 1919; whether it is the case that a cheque was received by this officer on 19th November, 1919, and returned on the same day; whether it was disallowed by the War Office; whether he can state the reason; and, in view of the urgent need of this soldier, will he take steps to have this case satisfactorily settled immediately?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Orders were given on the 6th instant for payment to this officer of a gratuity on retirement of —1,500.

Mr. MACLEAN: Was the gratuity disallowed, and has this officer since received anything?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Orders were given on the 6th instant for payment. This officer's gratuity on retirement was —1,500.

Oral Answers to Questions — EGYPTIAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCE.

Major MOLSON: 14.
asked the Secretary of State for War what are the numbers of Territorial Force and temporary commissioned medical officers with over three years' war service compulsorily retained in the Egyptian Expeditionary Force; and whether he can give any hope of early demobilisation to these medical officers, as they are suffering serious hardship by being away from their practices and families?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I regret that the information asked for in the first part of the question is not available. It could not be obtained without much labour and research involving reference to Egypt, and if obtained it would not be reliable, as the numbers are changing from day to day. With regard to the last part of the
question, I can only say that every Regular officer of the Royal Army Medical Corps who can be spared has already been sent out in relief of the Special Reserve Territorial Force and temporary officers who wish to be released, and that further officers of these categories are being sent home as establishments are reduced.

Major M0LS0N: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great deal of soreness amongst the Territorials of the Royal Army Medical Corps that some of them, who have served since 1914 or 1915, are still out of the country?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Well, I will look into any specially hard cases, but I cannot agree, while any compulsory military power remains to me, to leave the troops without their proper complement of medical officers. Such action might result in more severe suffering being inflicted than in the present case. Everything in human power that can be done will be done.

Oral Answers to Questions — HEMEL HEMPSTED (MILITARY HOSPITAL).

Mr. TALBOT: 16.
asked the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been drawn to the report of the coroner's inquest on the death of the officer commanding the military hospital at Hemel Hempsted for venereal diseases; whether he is aware that evidence given at the inquest disclosed a state of laxity of discipline in the hospital; will he state whether any and what steps he proposes to take to protect the inhabitants of the district from the dangers to which they have been and are exposed by what has happened; and will he consider the desirability of moving the hospital to a more isolated neighboar hood?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I am aware of the facts of this case. I regret to say that a recent inspection of the hospital revealed that the administration was seriously at fault, and the supersession of the late commanding officer was recommended by the inspecting officer. At the previous inspection in August, just before Colonel Parry took over command, the state of the hospital was found quite satisfactory. A capable officer has now been placed in charge, and it is anticipated that there will be an immediate improvement in the conditions. With regard
to the latter part of the question, there is no danger to the inhabitants from ordinary social intercourse with those of the inmates who are allowed out of such hospitals. This hospital could not be moved to another district without incurring considerable expense and giving rise to similar protests in any new area proposed, and I regret I cannot agree to such a course.

Mr. TALBOT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in consequence of a deputation of the local bodies and the county council that an undertaking was given by a commanding officer at the War Office that steps should be taken to restrict the patients within bounds? In view of that undertaking, cannot the right hon. Gentleman take steps that there shall be restriction?

Mr. CHURCHILL: No, Sir, I cannot. I am not aware of any such undertaking having been given. I am not sure that it would be proper to give such an undertaking. The patients are not criminals. I cannot remove the hospital. The same objections would be entertained to its being placed anywhere else.

Major NALL: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire why the next highest authority failed to discover the state of affairs?

Mr. CHURCHILL: That is not on the Paper. As I say, the inspection in August was satisfactory. The laxity of administration arose at a later period.

Mr. TALBOT: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire whether the undertaking mentioned was given?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Yes, I will make inquiry about that.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH ARMY.

MILITARY OFFENCES (SENTENCES).

Mr. HAILWOOD: 18.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the release of all men in the Army who are undergoing sentences for military offences committed during the War?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I would refer my hon. Friend to my reply on Wednesday last to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Pontypridd, and to the full
statement which I made on the subject of the suspension and remission of sentences generally.

Mr. HAILWOOD: Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that a man with two or three years' service to his credit is more entitled to release than a conscientious objector?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I do not quite realise what my hon. Friend has in his mind. Does he mean that a man who has committed a murder with two or three years' military service is more entitled to release than a conscientious objector?

Mr. HAILWOOD: No; I meant men having two or three years' service to their credit, although they have committed some military crime, are more entitled to freedom than conscientious objectors.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The men who are in prison still have committed the most serious military crimes—crimes which in war time are practically within the area of the death sentence. I do not consider it is possible to deal with such men in any other way than the way we have done.

CORPS OF MILITARY ACCOUNTANTS.

Sir FRANCIS BLAKE: 19 and 20.
asked (1) what is to be the full establishment of the corps of military accountants; what number of permanent appointments have been made; how many temporary officers are serving in it; from what sources it is proposed to complete the establishment;
(2) whether he will consider the possibility of appointing combatant rank officers to the corps of military accountants, provided they can attain the necessary standards in accounting, and thereby enable them, by continuing their service, to earn an adequate retiring allowance?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The permanent establishment projected for the corps of military accountants is 110 officers and 900 other ranks; but owing to the novelty of the work and other elements of uncertainty, these numbers are subject to revision. No permanent commissions in the corps have yet been granted; but at the present time 298 officers with professional qualifications are employed on temporary commissions. No question of further appointments to complete establishment therefore arises.

ST. GEORGE'S BARRACKS, LONDON.

Major GLYN: 22.
asked whether any decision has been taken regarding the future use of St. George's Barracks, London; whether these barracks are now fully occupied or used for purely military purposes; and, if so, for what purpose and by whom are they occupied?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The site of St. George's Barracks was handed over to His Majesty's Office of Works in 1912, in. exchange for other premises. The buildings with certain minor exceptions were removed, and the site is now under the control of that Department.

RAILWAY FARES.

Lieut.-Colonel w. GUINNESS: 24.
asked whether any decision has yet been arrived at to return to the pre-war system by which the Army, when not travelling on duty, paid the same railway fares as the general public, instead of receiving their tickets for one-third of the usual rateunder certain conditions as at present?

Mr. CHURCHILL: No, Sir; the question is still under consideration.

MAJOR AND LIEUTENANT-GENERALS.

Lieut.-Colonel W. GUINNESS: 25.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will state the number of major-generals on the Active List on 4th August, 1914, 11th November, 1918, and at the present time?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The number of major-generals on the Active List on the dates mentioned were: 4th August, 1914, 86; 11th November, 1918. 172; 12th December, 1919, 147.

Lieut.-Colonel W. GUINNESS: 26.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will state the number of lieutenant-generals on the Active List on 4th August, 1914, 11th November, 1918, and at the present time?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The numbers are as follow: 4th August, 1914, 19; 11th November, 1918, 34; 12th December, 1919, 48. The increase is due to promotions as rewards for distinguished service in the field. Of these officers twenty-five are unemployed.

SALVAGE WORK (FRANCE AND BELGIUM).

Mr. DOYLE: 27.
asked how many people are employed by his Department in
France and Belgium on salvage work; to what nationalities they belong; what are the rates of pay per day; what is the total result of their work during the last twelve months; and how long he anticipates that the work will last?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I would refer my hon. Friend to the replies to questions by the hon. and gallant Member for the Clackmannan and Eastern Division on 28th October and 3rd December. Since the former answer the numbers have been reduced considerably, and are decreasing daily. The British troops receive the ordinary rates of pay, and the Chinese about 2s. 2d. a day.

REGULAR COMMISSIONS.

Brigadier-General CROFT: 29.
asked the Secretary for War whether he is aware that there are many officers whose names have gone forward for Regular commissions who have no knowledge as to when, if ever, their services will be called upon; and whether, in justice to those gentlemen, who are unable to take up any occupation, he will cause definite statements to be made to each officer concerned as to when he is likely to be gazetted to Borne unit?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to my reply on 27th November to the hon. and gallant Member for Buckingham. I regret that the proposal contained in the last part of the question is impracticable.

Brigadier-General CROFT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the very greatest distress has been caused by these gentlemen being led to understand that they were going to be seconded to Regular units and they have no knowledge whether they are going to be employed?

Mr. CHURCHILL: My hon. and gallant Friend will see the difficulty on account of the numbers involved. I agree that the uncertainty must be settled at an early date. I hope before Parliament meets again, when I lay my scheme for the new post-war Army before the House, the matter will be dealt with.

DEMOBILISATION.

Brigadier-General CROFT: 30.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that numerous officers have recently been demobilised without any notice whatsoever;
whether he is aware that in one unit many officers were demobilised at two hours' notice; and, in view of the distress created in such cases, he will cause notice of at least one month to be given to any officer whose services are likely to be dispensed with in order that they can make some attempt to secure civil occupation?

Mr. CHURCHILL: As explained in answer to questions by the hon. and gallant Member for Tonbridge on the 18th August last, Army Order 122, of March, 1919, lays down that all officers who are to be demobilised are to be given notice in writing of their prospective demobilisation prior to being sent for dispersal, and that this notice should be given as early as practicable. I regret it is not possible to do more than this. Where an officer's demobilisation is approaching, but the actual date cannot be fixed, every help is given to enable him to make arrangements for civil employment, but no special leave for this purpose can be granted.

Brigadier-General CROFT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that in one unit no less than fourteen officers were warned to leave their units in one day?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I would like to have the particulars of that case. I assume that there was demobilisation leave and that they were not struck off pay and allowances on that day and they had their regular periods. I should, however, like to have the facts. I have no doubt a great deal of hardship is being caused to officers by the pressure of demobilisation.

Colonel YATE: Can he say what is the period?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I would not like to say offhand, but I should be glad to answer a question on the subject.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir F. HALL: Is it not a fact that these officers must return to civil life, considering the great necessity of reducing the Army from what it was in war-time?

Mr. CHURCHILL: That is so.

Mr. HIRST: 35.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will furnish figures showing the daily average number of telegrams dealt with at the Signal Office at General Headquarters, Great Britain, during the two weeks ending 27th Septem-
ber and the two weeks ending 6th December; whether he will also state the daily average number of telegrams dealt with between the hours of 8 p.m. and 9 a.m. during the same periods; how many Post Office telegraphists are retained at this office; what are their ranks; how many are eligible for demobilisation under current Regulations; what are the special circumstances requiring their retention in the Army; whether he will state the average cost of these men in military pay and allowances, and also in civil pay to the Post Office authorities; whether there is any reason why this office should not be staffed by one or two civilians with a great saving to the Exchequer; and whether, having regard to the great waste of money and force which has taken place at this office since March, 1918, when the Signal Office was transferred to the military authorities, he will insist on a searching investigation being made into the reasons for the retention of civilian telegraphists on military duties?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The answer to this question is too lengthy to read out, and, with the hon. Member's permission, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL. REPORT.
The following is the reply mentioned:
The number of telegrams dealt with at the Signal Office, General Headquarters, Great Britain, during the periods mentioned was 2,013 and 819. It is not possible to give the number of messages dealt with during specified hours of the day, as all the messages are destroyed after a few days, in accordance with military Regulations. Seven Post Office telegraphists are employed at the office including one company sergeant-major, one corporal, two second corporals, and three sappers. All are eligible for demobilisation, but have volunteered to defer their demobilisation until their services can be dispensed with. The cost of the military emoluments of the staff (including pay, allowances, rations, etc.) is approximately £1,500 per annum. I cannot say without inquiry the amount of civil pay issued by the Post Office authorities. As regards the necessity for the employment of military telegraphists in the office in question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answers given to the hon. Members for Houghton-le-Spring and Barnard Castle on 18th August and 29th October, respectively, to which I have nothing to add.

MEN SERVING IN FORCES.

Mr. CHARLES EDWARDS: 32.
asked the Secretary of State for War if he will give the number of men serving in His Majesty's forces in June, 1914. and the number serving to-day?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The numbers serving on 1st August, 1914, exclusive of the military wing of the Royal Flying Co[...]pe, was 238,644. The numbers serving on 1st December, 1919, who are comparable with the above figure is about 229,000. This figure excludes all demobilisable personnel, men who volunteered for one year's service and special enlistments for one year. The two latter classes become time-expired during the next three months. The total number of personnel serving with the Forces on 1st December, including all classes, was approximately 485,000.

VOLUNTEER BATTALIONS.

Commander Viscount CURZON: 33.
asked whether the Volunteers were considered to be part of His Majesty's Forces for the purposes of the War; and, if so, whether they were paid for their services by a grant to the Volunteer battalions or in any other way?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part of the question, Volunteers did not receive military pay, apart from the Special Service Companies who were engaged on whole-time duties for a limited period in 1918. An allowance of 5d. (latterly increased to 6d.) per six hours was made in lieu of rations for Volunteers engaged on temporary services (e.g., guarding vulnerable points) under the orders of General Officers Commanding the Military Commands. No grants were made to Volunteer battalions as such, but grants for clothing and administrative expenses of Volunteer units were made to Territorial Force Associations.

ANTI-AIRCRAFT STATION, PUTNEY HEATH.

Sir ARTHER FELL: 34.
asked what is the reason for maintaining the anti-aircraft station near the reservoir on Putney Heath; if the lorries employed there and the guns are of any possible use; and when will the station be closed down?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The anti-aircraft station near the reservoir on Putney Heath has been maintained as it is the
headquarters of the West London Anti-Aircraft Defences, and is responsible for closing down the forty-six stations in these defences. This work is nearing completion, and it is hoped to vacate Putney Heath in the early part of January next. The headquarters will then be transferred to one of the stations which it is proposed to maintain under the new scheme. The lorries referred to are employed on work conected with the clearing of the stations mentioned. There are no permanent guns at the headquarters.

RECRUITS (UNDER-AGE ENLISTMENT).

Mr. N. MACLEAN: 37.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether Private J. Mills, No. 75820, 1st battalion Highland Light Infantry, is under eighteen years of age; whether his mother has made application for his release and been refused; whether he can state the grounds for this refusal; and whether, in view of the number of such enlistments and the subsequent applications for their release, he can give any assurance that the desires of their parents for the release of boys under eighteen will be granted?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The application for the discharge of Private Mills was refused as no reasonable grounds existed for authorising his discharge. I regret I cannot give the assurance asked for in the last part of the question. If the hon. Member will call on the Director-General of Demobilisation, War Office (St. James's Park), details of this particular case and the method of dealing with all such applications will be fully explained to him.

Mr. MACLEAN: Does the right hon. Gentleman wish us to understand that the safety of the country depends on the retention in the Army of boys under eighteen years of age whose homes are in a state of destitution and who are required at home to maintain their mothers and families?

Mr. CHURCHILL: There are Regulations covering these cases enabling the review of cases of young soldiers who, on enlistment, made a false statement as to their age. The making of a false attestation is an indictable offence, but if the youth is a well grown lad and physically fit and strong it is the practice, within
certain limitations, to hold him to the undertaking he enters into when he enlists.

Mr. MACLEAN: If it is an indictable offence, and if, under military Regulations, you could keep a lad who lied about his age at a time when he is supposed to be patriotic—that is, during the War—why should the mother of that boy be penalised? It is not the boy who is penalized but his home. I should like to ask further, under what military Regulations he can hold a boy under eighteen years of age when the parents make application for his release?

Mr. CHURCHILL: We certainly have the power to do so, and in many cases, the boy wishes to stay. The pay which is given him in the Army enables him to make a considerable remittance to his home.

Mr. MACLEAN: I want the Regulations and not a general statement. In this case the boy is not willing to remain in the Army, he wants to get out.

Sir H. CRAIK: Will the right hon Gentleman resist the desire apparently entertained on the part of Labour Members to force young men against their will to retire from the profession of arms?

Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he is building up his Army under false pretences?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I cannot admit that. Here are young men who joined the Army and have since got older and stronger. We have spent money on their training and feeding, and general development, and we are entitled to hold them to the undertaking which they made in their attestation papers. But if any special circumstances are brought to our notice we give them consideration. As soon as the Conscription Act lapses it will be quite possible for anyone interested to buy them out of the Army.

Mr. STANTON: If we had no Army where would the Labour party be?

Mr. MACLEAN: I have asked the right hon. Gentleman to quote the Regulation under which he holds this boy.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I cannot give chapter and verse off-hand, but if a question is put on the Paper I will state the authority under which we act.

Oral Answers to Questions — PUBLIC EXECUTIONER (FEE).

Mr. HAILWOOD: 40.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that the rate of payment to the executioner and his assistants remains the same as it did before the War; and what steps he proposes to take to remedy this?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Major Baird): I do not know whether there has been any increase in the payments made to the executioner by the sheriff who is responsible for the carrying out of the execution. The fee paid by the Prison Commissioners to the assistant executioner has not been increased. No representation has been made to me that the fees are inadequate, and I do not propose to take any steps.

Mr. HAILWOOD: Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that in the case of the assistant executioners, having regard to their present rate of pay, they are actually out of pocket when they have to attend?

Mr. HAYDAY: In view of the very effective proficiency of these professional gentlemen can the hon. Gentleman inform us the comparative results of their fees of a period of five years before the War and in the last five years? Further, in the interests of the community, will the hon. Gentleman's Department, in the event of these gentlemen refusing to carry out their duties, perform them?

Mr. SPEAKER: Neither of these questions arises out of the answer.

Oral Answers to Questions — REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

Mr. HAILWOOD: 41.
asked the Home Secretary if he is aware that a Departmental Committee was appointed in June, 1918, to inquire into and report on the conditions of service for reformatory and industrial school staffs; is he aware that the Report was handed to the Treasury on 12th April, 1919; and can he say how soon it will be laid upon the Table of the House?

Major BAIRD: Yes, Sir. I have sent the Report to all the schools and to the local authorities, and I have made arrangements with the Treasury which will enable effect to be given without delay to the recom-
mendations of the Committee. It is not proposed to issue the Report as a Parliamentary Paper, but I will gladly give a copy of the Report to any hon. Member who would like to have it.

Oral Answers to Questions — ALLEN REVOLUTIONARY PROPAGANDA.

Mr. DOYLE: 42
asked the Home Secretary if he can give any further information as to the activities of certain persons who are carrying on a revolutionary propaganda in this country; whether any and, if so, how many alien revolutionary propagandists have been deported during the last three months; whether the money derived from alien sources has been traced to its source; and if his information is now sufficiently complete to allow him to state who are the Brtish subscribers to revolutionary propaganda in the United Kingdom?

Major BAIRD: I cannot add anything to the reply given to the hon. Member last Tuesday, except that the number of alien revolutionary propagandists deported during the past three months is two.

Mr. DOYLE: Are any Members or ex-Members of Parliament among the subscribers?

Major BAIRD: I caunot say.

Oral Answers to Questions — ALEXANDRA PALACE INTERNMENT CAMP.

Mr. N. MACLEAN: 44.
asked the Home Secretary whether Miss Lillian Scott Troy, an American citizen, was issued a permit, B.C. No. 534, to visit Baron Horst at Alexandra Palace on the 27th day of January, 1919; and was the interview arranged to take place in Lieutenant Minister's office?

Major BAIRD: I do not know. The internment camp at Alexandra Palace has long been closed.

Oral Answers to Questions — MINISTRIES AND SECRETARIES BILL.

Sir HENRY CRAIK: 46.
asked the Prime Minister if he can give an undertaking that early next Session the Minis-
tries and Secretaries Bill will be reintroduced and prosecnted, or that some other remedy will be found for the present unsatisfactory situation of certain Ministers, both as regards status and emoluments, and for the anomalous condition now prevailing under which certain Ministers receive smaller salaries than officers serving under them in their Departments?

Mr. BONAR LAW: The Government fully recognise the anomalies and unfairness of the present arrangement, but I am not in a position to make any statement at present

Sir H. CRAIK: I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his answer. I hope to have an opportunity during an early Debate to raise this question.

Mr. STEWART: Do the Government consider that the Minister for Education and the Minister of Labour are adequately remunerated with —2,000 a year?

Mr. SONAR LAW: The Government do not think so, and, in addition to that, they think it is very unfair as compared with the payments to other Ministers.

Major W. MURRAY: Is the Secretary for Scotland adequately remunerated?

Captain REDMOND: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the poor Chief Secretary for Ireland should get more?

Mr. DEVLIN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware there are many Ministers and Secretaries who are not worth anything at all?

Mr. SONAR LAW: That may have been so, but that. is not the case at present.

Oral Answers to Questions — CIVILIAN DISTRESS (NATIONAL RELIEF FUND).

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: 48.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he is now in a position to make a definite statement to the House as to whether the National Relief Fund is available in cases of civilian distress owing to discharges from the Royal dockyards; and whether the fund is also available in cases of civilian distress arising out of the very small naval and military pensions granted to widows
in pre-war times, these pensions being inadequate to meet the rise in the price of living and the needs of growing families?

Captain LOSEBY: 45.
asked the Prime Minister if he has received a communication from the Bradford Executive Committee of the Lord Mayor's Relief Fund, urging that a scheme should immediately be prepared and put into operation for disbursement of the balance of the National Relief Fund for relief of distress amongst discharged Service men; and if he is prepared to make any recommendation in regard thereto?

Mr. ADAMSON: 50.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he is now in a position to state what arrangements have been made with the Executive of the National Relief Fund regarding the disbursement of moneys for the relief of distress due to unemployment?

Mr. BONAR LAW: The answer to the first part of the hon. Member for Bradford's question is in the affirmative. I understand that the Executive Committee of the National Relief Fund are still considering the question of making their surplus funds available for the relief of distress due to unemployment arising out of the War. It is expected that a decision will be reached without delay.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly answer the last part of my question which relates to pre-war widows of naval and military men, and more especially to naval pensioners?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I do not think it would be right to give relief from that fund in those cases.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the reason why the question is asked is because these widows are suffering, like other people, from the high cost of living, and are they not as much entitled to relief as unemployed persons so far as this Fund goes, because it does arise out of the War?

Mr. BONAR LAW: No, I think not. My hon. Friend is simply pressing claims he has very much at heart, but I do not think they arise here.

Mr. W. THORNE: Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to let us know whether this surplus money will be distributed before Christmas?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I am sorry that a definite policy has not yet been reached. There have been many meetings of the Committee, and I hope it will be settled soon, but I hardly hope that it will be before Christmas.

Captain REDMOND: Has the Government a definite policy about anything?

Mr. BONAR LAW: Yes, Sir.

Oral Answers to Questions — NATIONAL REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE.

Major GODFREY PALMER: 52.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the approximate daily national expenditure on 1st November, 1919, and 1st December, 1919, respectively?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the -TREASURY (Mr. Baldwin): The average daily expenditure (Exchequer issues and Civil Contingency Fund advances unrepaid) for the 214 days from 1st April to 31st October was —4,063,227, and for the 244 days from 1st April to 30th November—3,990,496.

Mr. HOGGE: 56.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state the amount of the national revenue and expenditure for the current year up to the 13th December; and the amount by which the Floating Debt has been increased since the 7th August?

Mr. BALDWIN: The Exchequer receipts from 1st April to 13th December were —649,455,801, and the Exchequer issues —1,054,095,847. As my right hon. Friend has frequently explained, the revenue is more unevenly distributed through' the year than the expenditure, and a direct comparison between the above figures is misleading. With regard to Floating Debt, Treasury Bills have increased since 7th August by approximately —343,000,000, and Ways and Means Advances decreased by approximately —174,000,000, making a net increase of approximately —169,000,000.

Oral Answers to Questions — YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION (TREASURY LOAN).

Captain ORMSBY-GORE: 53.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Treasury have made a Grant of —200,000
to the Young Men's Christian Association; whether this Grant. is a loan and, if so, when it is to be repaid and what is the rate of interest; and whether similar Grants. or loans have been or will be made to the Young Women's Christian Association, the Salvation Army, and the Church Army, which did similar good work during the War?

Mr. BALDWIN: This question should have been addressed to the War Office. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War has asked me to give his answer, which is as follows: Advances have been made by the War Office, with the approval of the Treasury, to the Young Men's Christian Association in respect of the altogether exceptional calls upon their resources occasioned by their war work at home and in theatres of war. These sums are repayable with interest at 5 per cent. The date of repayment must depend upon a date, not yet arrived, at which these exceptional activities cease I am not aware of any occasion for similar loans to the other bodies mentioned in the question.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Has the balance-sheet of this association been received by the Treasury?

Mr. BALDWIN: When the War Office preferred a request they submitted all the data we required, and all the figures have been sent.

Sir J. D. REES: Will these Grants be recovered? I suppose there is no question of foregoing the Grants?

Mr. BALDWIN: It is a loan. I have every reason to hope that it will be repaid in time.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS (STAFFS).

Sir CHARLES HANSON: 54.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that under the Ministries of Food, Labour, Shipping, Coal Controller, and Board of Agriculture there are at present employed by these Departments in outside work throughout London and the Provinces, but not including the administrative and clerical staffs engaged in the offices of the Ministries in London, a total number of 18,893 persons, involving a total cost to the State per annum for salaries and incidental expenses, such as travelling and maintenance, amounting to —4,165,142; and whether, in view of the result of the con-
trols exercised, he will consider the desirability of the abolition of this costly machinery?

Mr. BALDWIN: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I do not think that the results of the controls can profitably be dealt with by way of question and answer, but I can assure my hon. Friend that the staffs in question have been, and are still being, continuously reviewed; in order to secure every possible reduction.

Oral Answers to Questions — INCOME TAX.

Mr. RODGER: 55.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state the amount of interest and dividends brought under review in the last three Income Tax years, showing the amount derived from home investments and the amount from foreign and Colonial investments?

Mr. BALDWIN: My right hon. Friend regrets that the information asked for could not be made available without calling for a special return, the preparation of which would involve an amount of labour which he would not feel justified in imposing upon an already overburdened Department.

Oral Answers to Questions — TREASURY BILLS AND WAYS AND MEANS ADVANCES.

Mr. HOGGE: 57.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state the amount of Treasury Bills and Ways and Means Advances on the 31st March, 1st August, 1st November, and 13th December, respectively?

Mr. BALDWIN: The figures are as follows:



Treasury Bills.
Ways and Means Advances.



£
£


31st March, 1919
957,236,000
454,992,000


1st August, 1919
748,145,000
429,577,600


1st Nov., 1919
1,069,622,000
224,582,600


13th Dec., 1919
1,111,022,000
230,782,600

Oral Answers to Questions — LICENCE DUTIES (ABATEMENT).

Mr. HOGGE: 58.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state the amount of the abatement allowed on Licence Duties on account of anticipated
loss of profits due to liquor restrictions: what is the total loss of revenue since 1914; and whether, in view of the fact that profits have not diminished but increased recoupment will be sought in respect of the abatements made?

Mr. BALDWIN: As regards the first two portions of this question, I would refer the hon. Member to the statement as to the position to the 31st March last contained in my right hon. Friend's reply of the 19th August last to a question on this subject by the hon. Member for the Kingswinford Division. No final figures for a later period are at present available. I may point out that allowances were originally made on account of the curtailment in the hours of sale and later on account of loss of business caused by the Intoxicating Liquor (Output and Delivery) Order, 1917. With the revocation of that Order as from the 19th ultimo, the allowances will practically cease. As regards the last portion of the question, the reply is in the negative.

Oral Answers to Questions — ENEMY ALIENS.

Mr. N. MACLEAN: 60.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in June, 1915, the then Secretary of State for the Home Department personally gave permission for Miss Lillian Scott Troy, an American citizen, to see a person interned as an alien?

Major BAIRD: No, Sir. The permission in question was given, I understand, by the military authorities.

Mr. MACLEAN: Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman explain why the Home Secretary a fortnight ago made the statement that no permit had been given to this lady to visit the alien?

Major BAIRD: Did it relate to the same thing?

Mr. SWAN: 61.
asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that Nathan Schneiderman, who fought in Russia against the Germans, was fined —20 at the Thames Police Court for attempting to land without permission; whether he has been deported; and how many of these Russian subjects who have fought in the War against Germany have been refused permission to land since the beginning of this year?

Major BAIRD: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, except that I have no knowledge that he fought in Russia against the Germans; to the second part, in the negative; and to the third part, none, to the best of my knowledge.

Oral Answers to Questions — MERCHANT SHIP CONSTRUCTION

Viscount CURZON: 62.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller what is the tonnage and number of merchant ships now under construction in the yards of the United Kingdom for Great Britain; and how many ships, and what is their tonnage, are building for foreign countries?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of SHIPPING (Colonel Wilson): The number and tonnage of merchant ships under 100 tons gross under construction in the yards of the United Kingdom on the 30th September, 1919, for Great Britain is 675, of approximately 3,196,000 tons gross. The number and tonnage of those building for foreign owners is 209, of approximately 878,000 tons gross. These figures do not include tugs, barges, and similar craft.

Oral Answers to Questions — EX-GERMAN SHIPS IN AMERICAN PORTS.

Viscount CURZON: 63.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller how many ex-German ships in American ports or under the control of the United States Government under the decision of the Peace Conference were awarded to England, France, and Italy; how many have now been handed over; and when the remainder of the ships, if any, may be expected?

Colonel WILSON: I would point out to the hon. and gallant Member that no division of enemy vessels between the Allies for final ownership can be made by the Reparation Commission until after the date of the coming into force of the Peace Treaty.
Under the Armistice arrangements ten German passenger steamers were delivered to the management of the United States for use in connection with the repatriation of American troops. On the completion of that service the vessels were reallocated by the Allied Maritime Transport Executive—nine to Britain and one
to France. Up to the present the United States have failed to re-deliver seven of those which were re-allocated to this country.
The matter has been placed officially before the United States authorities, and we continue to press them for the early transfer of the vessels.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is the allocation of seven passenger vessels permanent?

Colonel WILSON: No, there is no permanent allocation of these vessels. The permanent allocation will be made by the Reparation Commission.

Mr. STEWART: What reasons have the United States Government adduced for not delivering these vessels?

Colonel WILSON: Continued representations are being made to the United States authorities to transfer them.

Oral Answers to Questions — TINKERS (SCOTLAND).

Mr. JAMES GARDINER: 67.
asked the Secretary for Scotland what steps, if any, are being taken to house the tinkers, and educate and otherwise improve their children?

The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. Munro): As regards housing, the Scottish Board of Health, with the approval of the Secretary for Scotland and in co-operation with the local authorities concerned, have formulated a scheme for the utilisation of Army huts for housing tinkers in Caithness. A similar scheme for Perthshire is now under consideration. As regards education and improvement of tinker children, I have no reason to think that education authorities are failing to exercise their powers under the Education (Scotland) Acts and the Children Act.

Lieut.-Colonel W. GUINNESS: Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is a "tinker"?

Mr. DEVLIN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a"tinker"is a member of the Irish Government?

Oral Answers to Questions — FOOD SUPPLIES.

MILK (MAXIMUM RETAIL PRICE).

Major HENDERSON: 68.
asked the Food Controller whether he is now in a
position to make a statement in regard to any possible reduction in the present retail price of milk, particularly in reference to Glasgow?

The MINISTER of FOOD (Mr. Roberts): I have carefully reconsidered the maximum retail price of winter milk, in view of the opinion expressed by the Milk Prices Investigation Committee. Their opinion was based on the assumption that the average yield per cow in milk was 2 gallons a day, whereas my advisers had estimated that it would not exceed 1½ gallons. I told them that if their estimate was correct I would alter the prices. If the opinion of my advisers was correct, I would adhere to them, and I deferred my decision until I could receive some 80,000 returns of milk production for the week ending Saturday, the 6th December. These returns have now been received, and the summary of results, subject to checking, shows an average production per cow per day as follows:


England and Wales
1.33
gallons.


Scotland
1.68
"


Great Britain
1.35
"


In the circumstances, I am unable to modify the maximum prices, which were fixed in agreement with the Department of Agriculture after the mast exhaustive investigation into the cost of production that has ever been effected in this country. With one recommendation of the Investigation Committee I was always in strong sympathy—namely, that steps should be taken to secure for children under five years of age and for nursing and expectant mothers adequate supplies of milk. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Health agrees with me that all practicable steps should be taken in this direction, and I am, with his concurrence, issuing an amendment of the prsent Order which governs the price and distribution of milk in these cases.

Sir M. DOCKRELL: What is the yield of an Irish cow?

Mr. W. THORNE: What is the price of milk in Scotland and in this country?

Mr. ROBERTS: I cannot say from memory, but Scotland is subject to the maximum price which prevails in the country.

Mr. THORNE: What is the amount? Is it less than in this country?

Mr. ROBERTS: If my hon. Friend puts down a question I will make inquiries.

Mr. HAYDAY: Has my right hon. Friend's attention been called to a statement by a farmer that they had the whip hand and intended to keep it, while discussing this very problem of food prices?

Mr. ROBERTS: I have seen many statements.

Mr. HAYDAY: You have not seen that?

Mr. ROBERTS: No; nor should I have had an opportunity of testing it if I had seen it.

Major HENDERSON: In what respect is the right hon. Gentleman going to amend this Order with regard to mothers' milk?

Mr. ROBERTS: A strong objection has been advanced to the use of the word"necessitous"in the Order, and that has been interpreted to restrict the supplies of this cheaper milk to cases which have to be proved after investigation to be necessitous. We propose now to invest the local authority with power to give it in such cases where they feel the local circumstances warrant it.

Mr. HURD: When will the new Order come in?

Mr. ROBERTS: I am in consultation with the Minister of Health, and I hope we shall be able to do it this week.

Oral Answers to Questions — FOOD CONTROL.

STATEMENT BY MR. ROBERTS.

Mr. DOYLE: 69.
asked the Food Controller how long he anticipates the control of the principal articles of food will last; what steps are being taken to release essential articles; and what are the profits received by his Department on meat, bacon, butter, sugar, and cheese during the last twelve months?

Mr. ROBERTS: It is extremely difficult to forecast with any accuracy the future of the world food supplies, and consequently to set a limit to a continuance of some degree of control. Generally speaking, I propose to free all home agricultural products except wheat during the first six months of next year. As I have already stated, so long as there is a world shortage of sugar and of butter some method of organised distribution of these commodities must be maintained. The rigid
measures of control appropriate to war conditions are, in my opinion, unsuited for a period of transition; but I am clear in my own mind that some degree of supervision of our food supplies will have to be exercised for at least three years to come. What powers will be necessary to enforce this supervision and to what Department of State the appropriate functions should be entrusted will be for Parliament to determine.
The latest available accounts of the trading transactions of the Ministry of Food, namely, those for the financial year ending 31st March last, are published in Command Paper 286, to which I would refer the hon. Member. It is not possible at the present stage to give figures for the financial year ending 31st March next, but I may say, that, so far as it is possible to estimate in advance, I anticipate that over the three years ending 31st March next, the margin of profit made by the Ministry will amount probably to not more than one-tenth of 1 per cent. over the whole turnover during this period.

Sir F. HALL: What has it been during the last twelve months, not what it will be in the next three years?

Mr. ROBERTS: If my hon. Friend will read the reply he will see that I referred him to Command Paper 286, in which he will get all the information.

Sir F. HALL: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what the figures are?

Mr. ROBERTS: No, I cannot trust to my memory.

Mr. CLYNES: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether in the case of certain articles of food which were recently decontrolled the effect was a considerable rise in price, and can he also say in regard to the opinion already expressed how far that opinion represents the view of the Government?

Mr. ROBERTS: It is quite time that in the case of one article which I can call to mind, the decontrol had the effect of a slight reduction in price, and thereafter a considerable advance in price. Therefore we came to the conclusion that decontrol was not in the best interests of the consumer. With respect to the future of the Ministry, of course., that will be for Parliament to determine; our existence will automatically come to an end about August next, and some action must be taken by the Government.

Mr. CLYNES: In view of the reply of the right hon. Gentleman I beg to give notice that at an early date I 'shall raise the question.

Mr. E. WOOD: Has the right hon. Gentleman definitely decided to continue control of home produced meat until 31st July?

Mr. ROBERTS: I have decided to continue it for the present. I do not know whether one can continue it down to 31st July.

FISHING GEAR (PRICES).

Major MKENZIE WOOD: 71.
asked the Food Controller whether he is aware that there is extensive profiteering at present on nets and other fishing gear; and whether, seeing that maximum prices have been fixed for fish, maximum prices can also be fixed for the gear required to, catch the fish?

Mr. ROBERTS: My Department has not received any complaints in respect of profiteering in fishing nets and gear. As regards the second part of the question, I have no power to fix maximum prices in respect of the sale of these articles.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that owing to the price of fish which has been. fixed there is great danger of many fishing vessels on the North-East. Coast of England having to be laid up, and that there will be a shortage of fish?

Mr. ROBERTS: That is not my opinion, otherwise I would not have fixed the price. I always realised that in fixing prices you have to have regard to the necessity for securing supplies, and we believe that the prices we have fixed are sufficient to maintain supplies and to provide adequate remuneration.

POTATOES.

Mr. J. GARDINER: 73.
asked the Food Controller how many tons of sound ware potatoes were allowed to be lost for table purposes; and when the accounts relating to the 1918 potato crop will be laid upon the Table?

Mr. ROBERTS: I presume the hon. Member refers in the first part of the question to losses owing to abnormal wastage. The necessary returns have not yet been received from several of the local committees appointed; and this fact together with the large number of claims
requiring consideration, makes it impossible for the to say at the present moment when the final accounts will be presented. I can assure the hon. Member that the work will be done as quickly as is possible.

Mr. GARDINER: What about the wastage of potatoes left over—not abnormal wastage, but wastage by neglect?

Mr. ROBERTS: I am not aware of the circumstances referred to. If my hon. Friend has any case to bring to my attention, I will look into it if he will forward the particulars.

DATES.

Mr. RAPER: 74.
asked the Food Controller what is the actual loss made on bad and indifferent dates imported during the last year by the Ministry; how much has been recovered from the merchants who sold them to the Ministry; and what steps are being taken to recover the balance?

Mr. ROBERTS: No loss has been incurred on any dates imported on account of the Ministry of Food. I should say, however, that in February of this year the Ministry agreed to dispose of a quantity of dates purchased on the War Office account, and found, after the Armistice, to be surplus to the requirements of the troops. Owing to the lateness of the season, and the bad condition of some of these dates, it was necessary for them to be sold at varying prices below cost price. It is not yet possible to give the actual loss incurred, but, so far as can at present be estimated, it will amount to approximately —166,000. Of this, —12,000 has been recovered from the sellers, and negotiations are proceeding as to the sellers' liability in respect of certain dates which were rejected as not being up to standard. All steps will be taken to recover from the sellers the amount for which they are legally liable.

Mr. ATKEY: Was not the original contract part of a joint one between the Food Ministry and the War Office, and is it not a fact that no legal liability attaches to the original seller?

Mr. ROBERTS: The dates of which complaint is made were brought in on War Office account, and not on account of the Ministry of Food. As regards the
legal aspect of the matter, my hon. Friend cannot be correct, because we have already recovered —12,000.

Sir F. HALL: Was not the War Office the actual seller of the dates to the Food Controller?

Mr. ROBERTS: I thought I had made it clear. The War Office had a surplus, and they asked us to take over that surplus and dispose of it to the best advantage. That we did.

Sir F. HALL: Where would be the advantage to the country of any part of the —154,000 shortage being obtained from the War Office by the Food Controller? Is it not waste of time?

Mr. ROBERTS: There is no money wasted that comes to the Ministry of Food.

Sir F. HALL: Is it not a waste of time taking action against another Government Department And putting them down as the seller?

Mr. ROBERTS: My hon. Friend misunderstood me. I do not regard the War Office as being the seller.

Oral Answers to Questions — INDIA.

RIOTS AT AMRITSA.

Sir D. MACLEAN (by Private Notice): asked the Secretary of State for India whether he can inform the House when the Inquiry into the occurrence at Amritsa will be completed, whether a Report will be immediately available for Members of this House; when did he become acquainted with the details of the occurrence, and what reason was there for not informing the House thereon; and, further, has any action been taken by the authorities to express to the General in Command their opinion of his conduct?

The SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Montagu): I do not know when the result of the Inquiry, which is an open one, will be obtained. The Committee is at present taking evidence. I hope the evidence will be completed at the end of this month, and as soon as I get the result of the Inquiry it will be given to this House. As regards the remainder of the question, I can quite appreciate the profound disturbance which must have been caused in public opinion by the evidence
published, but I trust my right hon. Friend and the House will agree with me that we are right in waiting until an impartial, authoritative pronouncement on all the facts is made by Lord Hunter's Committee. I have not received any de tailed account, nor do I expect to do so, because the Viceroy and the Government and I agreed the formation of a Committee of Inquiry, which will present a Report on all the circumstances.

Sir D. MACLEAN: My right hon. Friend has not answered one point, and that was, when did he become aware of the occurrence, and what reason, if he had heard of it, had he for not informing the House of it?

Mr. MONTAGU: I thought I said that I knew of no details of the circumstances until I saw the report in the newspapers. It is not an official communication yet. I cannot expect that the evidence can be reported to me, because the machinery that we had devised was to have a Committee of Inquiry. It will be the Committee of Inquiry that will report to me on the facts and the circumstances and the evidence.

Sir D. MACLEAN: Is it the practice in the India Office that the Secretary of State for India would not hear of an occurrence of this nature which happened eight months ago?

Mr. MONTAGU: When the riots were occurring I published a series of communiqués giving the information as it was telegraphed to me. The result of the detailed investigation which has been going on has been prepared by the authorities in India to lay before Lord Hunter's Committee.

Sir H. CRAIK: Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that at this moment it is most undesirable that any opinion should be expressed in this House on this subject, which is now under consideration by Lord Hunter's Committee, based upon what he states to be unauthorised reports?

Mr. MONTAGU: I am quite sure that the House does not want to prejudge the matter. At the same time I cannot help saying that the evidence as published in the newspapers is profoundly disturbing, and I cannot help saying, also, that that is why I hope that, without any unnecessary delay, Lord Hunter's findings will be available. The Committee are sitting continuously. They have completed evidence
at Lahore, they have three or four other places to finish, and I hope that the evidence will be completed by the end of the month.

Sir D. MACLEAN: In view of the very deeply agitated state of the public mind on this occurrence, will my right hon. Friend see that a special Report on this occurrence is sent to him, and will he publish it immediately he receives it?

Sir H. CRAIK: Will the right hon. Gentleman refuse to publish part of the evidence until the whole of the Inquiry is completed?

Mr. MONTAGU: The Committee which was appointed I believe to be an authoritative and impartial one. It is presided over by a distinguished judge. I would deprecate interfering with their decisions, but I hope as soon as the investigation is completed to publish everything quite fully.

Mr. MacVEAGH: Can the right hon. Gentleman explain how it happens that an incident which occurred eight months ago, in which 500 Indians were killed and 1,500 wounded, was not made known in this country for a period of eight months?

Mr. MONTAGU: There were statements published relating to this occurrence as they were received. As the months have gone by more and more evidence has been collected, which is now available for Lord Hunter's Committee. The casualties involve one of the most difficult points. It is very difficult to say the exact number of men who unfortunately lost their lives in these occurrences. Various estimates have been furnished, and I look to Lord Hunter's Committee to give the Empire and this House the authoritative figures.

Lord R. CECIL: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government of India. exercise any censorship to prevent the telegraphing of the evidence before Lord Hunter's Committee, because apparently this has only come by mail?

Mr. MONTAGU: I believe that there has been no censorship in India. There may have been a censorship during the riots in the Punjab, but none since. The wires are very much congested, and it may have been for that reason that none of this evidence was telegraphed.

Colonel YATE: Is it not a fact that the English papers have selected the evidence
of one particular witness, and that all the evidence of the magistrate's and other people who gave evidence prior to that witness has not been published in England, and that in fact we have had no evidence published?

Mr. MONTAGU: I would invite Members to read the evidence as published in the Indian newspapers. The selection of this particular piece of evidence was, I believe, due to the enterprise of one particular London Journal, which always seems to me to be the best informed of them on Indian affairs. They selected this particular one from what was sent by their correspondent in Allahabad, which was copied into other newspapers, but the" Times of India" and other newspapers are available, and I shall place them where hon. Members Can see the whole evidence as published in Indian newspapers.

Oral Answers to Questions — IRELAND.

SUPPRESSION OF"FREEMAN'S JOURNAL"

Mr. DEVLIN: May I ask the Leader of the House whether, in view of the suppression of the Dublin"Freeman's Journal" by the military authorities in Ireland, he will postpone the discussion on the Irish Education Bill until the liberty of the Press is again established in Ireland?

Mr. BONAR LAW: No; I do not see the connection. The hon. Member must not take me as agreeing with him that the liberty of the Press does not exist. There is a difference between liberty and licence.

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN (by Private Notice): asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the"Freeman's Journal" has been suppressed; and, if so, whether it has been done by the military or the civil authority, and under what powers and for what reason?

The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Macpherson): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; the answer to the second is by the competent military authority after consultation with the civil authority; and the answer to the third is under the Defence of the Realm Regulation 27. The reasons are that the issue of the 15th of December contained statements flagrantly violating that Regulation.

Captain BENN: Will the right hon. Gentleman publish to this House the statements to which he takes exception?

Mr. MACPHERSON: I am afraid that that would be rather difficult, because I have seen a copy of the paper, and, in my judgment the whole of the paper practically violates that Regulation. The facts are these. The Regulation refers to statements published to the prejudice of the good discipline of the police force. Hon. Gentlemen opposite always take occasion to condemn me for the use of the military. They seem to forget that the ranks of the police are being thinned nightly. These men go out to their duty always in danger. They do it loyally. They do it steadfastly. I endeavoured, by circulating an appeal for volunteers front the loyal civilian population, to strengthen the Dublin police force. This paper, knowing the. circumstances better than any other paper in Ireland, immediately produces this issue, which is, as I said, a flagrant violation of that Regulation and a malevolent attempt to destroy the honest effort of the Irish Government to preserve the lives of the police.

Captain BENN: Will the right hon. Gentleman circulate to the Members of this House the statements to which he takes exception, so that they may judge for themselves?

Mr. MACPHERSON: The hon. Gentleman is an ex-Minister of the Crown. I will ask him to read the paper which is in the Reading Room, and if he does not take the same view as I do I shall be surprised.

Mr. HARTSHORN: Does yesterday's issue of this paper contain any statement which if published in an English newspaper would have involved suppression in this country?

Mr. MACPHERSON: Certainly, if the conditions were the same.

Mr. DEVLIN: Have not English papers published precisely the same statements and are not these English papers circulating in Ireland, and is it illegal for an Irish paper to publish documents of this character, and does it become illegal because it is an Irish paper published in Ireland, when an English paper publishing the same material is allowed to circulate in that district?

Mr. MACPHERSON: This is not a question of publishing a document. That
is only part of the offence. I would ask hon. Gentlemen who have got time to go to the Reading Room, where the paper is at the present moment, and read, for example, the leading article.

Mr. MacVEAGH: And the article upon yourself. That is the real explanation.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I have no doubt that there was an attack upon myself, but the House will believe me when I say that such an attack would not cause me to deviate for a single instant from what I believed to be my duty. This scurrilous abuse does not affect me. It is merely amusing. But I regret to say that other statements in this particular issue bear out what I have been saying, and I will leave the House to judge.

Mr. T. P. O'CONNOR (later): rose in his place, and asked leave to move the Adjournment of the House, for the purpose of calling attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the seizure and suppression by the military authorities of the 'Freeman's Journal' newspaper in Dublin as a dangerous invasion of the liberty of writing and speech in Ireland."
The pleasure of the House nut having been. signified, MR. SPEAKER called on those Members who supported the. Motion to rise in their places, and, not fewer than forty Members having accordingly risen,
The Motion stood over, under Standing Order No 10, until a quarter-past eight this erening.

BILL PRESENTED.

PROFITEERING (CONTINUANCE) BILL,—"to extend the duration of the Profiteering Act, 1919," presented by Sir AUCKLAND GEDDES; supported by Mr. Bridgeman; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 241.]

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to—

Trade Marks Bill,

Patents and Designs Bill, with Amendments.

Amendments to—

National Assembly of the Church. of England (Powers) Bill [Lords,], without Amendment.

TRADE MARKS BILL.

Lords Amendments to be considered To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 242.]

PATENTS AND DESIGNS BILL.

Lords Amendments to be considered To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 243.]

PUBLIC PETITIONS COMMITTEE.

Second Report. brought up, and read.

Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 232.]

DORMANT BANK BALANCES AND UNCLAIMED SECURITIES BILL,

Reported, without Amendment, from the Select Committee, with Special Report and Minutes of Evidence.

Report and Special Report to lie upon. the Table, and to be printed. [No. 233.]

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Shropshire, Worcestershire, and Staffordshire Electric Power Bill [Lords],

Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the proceedings on Government Business. be exempted at this day's Sitting from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[Mr. Boner Law.]

The House divided: Ayes, 192; Noes, 48.

Division No. 157.]
AYES.
[4.1 P.m.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Bagley, Captain E. A.
Barton, Sir William (Oldham)


Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte
Baird, John Lawrence
Beckett, Hon. Gervase


Allen, Col. William James
Baldwin, Stanley
Benn, Com. Ian Hamilton (Greenwich)


Archdale, Edward M.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Benitinck, Lt.-Col. Lord H. Cavendish


Atkey. A. R.
Barnston, Major H.
Bethell, Sir John Henry


Billing, Noel Pemberton
Hancock, John George
Parry, Lt.-Colonel Thomas Henry


Bird, Alfred
Hanna, G. B.
Pearce, Sir William


Blake, Sir Francis Douglas
Hanson, Sir Charies
Pease, Rt. Hon. Herbert Pike


Bridgeman William Clive
Harmsworth, Cecil R. (Luton, Beds.)
Peel, Col. Hon. S. (Uxbridge, Mddx.)


Briggs, Harold
Harris, Sir H. P. (Paddington, S.)
Pennelather, De Fonblanque


Burdon, Colonel Rowland
Hennessy, Major G.
Pratt, John William


Burn, Captain C. R. (Torquay)
Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.)
Purchase, H, G.


Burn, T. H. (Belfast)
Hilder, Lt. -Colonel F.
Raeburn, Sir William


Butcher, Sir J. G.
Hope, Lt.-Col. Sir J. (Midlothian)
Ramsden, G. T.


Carew, Charles R. S. (Tiverton)
Hops, John Deans (Berwick)
Rees, Sir J, D.


Carr, W. T.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Reid, D. D.


Carton, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.
Hopkinson, Austin (Mossley)
Remnant, Colonel Sir James


Casey, T. W.
Houston, Robert Paterson
Rendall, Athelstan


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Evelyn (Aston Manor)
Hughes, Spencer Leigh
Roberts, Rt. Hon. G. H. (Norwich)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Oxford Univ.)
Hunter, Gen. Sir Archibald (Lancaster)
Roberts, Sir S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord R. (Hitchin)
Hurd, P. A.
Robinson, S. (Brecon and Radnor)


Chamberlain, N. (Birm., Ladywood)
Jackson, Lt.-Col. Hon. F. S. (York)
Rodger, A. K.


Cheyne, Sir William Watson
Jephcott, A. R.
Roundell, Lt.-Colonel R. F.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.
Jellett, William Morgan
Rutherford, Col. Sir J. (Darwen)


Clay, Captain H. H. Spender
Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen)
Samuel, A. M. (Farnham, Surrey)


Clough, R.
Kidd, James
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Norwood)


Cockerill, Brig. -General G. K.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Sanders, Colonel Robert A.


Colvin, Brig. -General R. B.
Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Glasgow)
Seddon, James


Courthope, Major George Loyd
Lewis, T. A. (Pontypridd, Glam.)
Shaw, Hon. A. (Kilmarnock)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish University)
Lindsay, William Arthur
Simm. M. T.


Craig, Captain Charles C. (Antrim)
Lister, Sir R. Ashton
Stanier, Captain Sir Boville


Craig, Col. Sir James (Down, Mid.)
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. (Preeton)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Locker-Lampson, Com. o. (Hunt'don)
Stanton, Charles Butt


Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)
Lonsdale, James R,
Stephenson, Colonel H. K.


Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)
Lynn, R. J.
Stewart, Gershom


Dean, Com. P. T.
Macdonald, Rt. Hon. J. M. (Stirling)
Strauss, Edward Anthony


Dixon, Captain H.
M'Guffin, Samuei
Sturrock, J. Long-


Dockrell, Sir M.
Macmaster, Donald
Sutherland, Sir William


Doyle, N. Grattan
McMicking, Major Gilbert
Sykes, Col. Sir A. J. (Knutsford)


Duncannon, Viscount
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempstead)


Edge, Captain William
Macquisten, F. A.
Taylor, J. (Dumbarton)


Edwards, Major J. (Aberavon)
Mallalieu, Frederick William
Terrell, Capt. R. (Henley, Oxford)


Elliot, Captain W. E. (Lanark)
Malone, Major P. (Tottenham)
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell- (M'yhl.)


Eyres-Monsell, Commander
Middlebrook, Sir William
Thorpe, Captain John Henry


Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Moles, Thomas
Waddington, R.


Fell, Sir Arthur
Molson, Major John Eisdale
Waliace, J.


Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C.
Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)


FitzRoy, Captain Hon. Edward A.
Morison, T, B. (Inverness)
Wardle, George J.


Forestier-Walker, L.
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.
Waring, Major Walter


Ganzoni, Captain F. C.
Mosley, Oswald
Wason, John Cathcart


Gardiner, J. (Perth)
Mount, William Arthur
Weigall, Lt.-Colonel W. E. G. A.


Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham
Munro, Rt. Hon. Robert
White, Col. G. D. (Southport)


Gilmour, Lt.-Colonel John
Murray, Lt.-Col. Hon. A. C. (Aberdeen)
Whitia, Sir William


Glyn, Major R.
Murray, Major C. D. (Edinburgh, S.)
Williams, Lt.-Com. C. (Tavistock)


Goff, Sir Park
Murray, Hon. G. (St. Rollox)
Wilson, Colonel Leslie (Reading)


Gould, J. C.
Murray, William (Dumfries)
Wilson, Col. M. (Richmond, Yorks.)


Goulding, Rt. Hon. Sir E. A.
Nall, Major Joseph
Wilson-Fox, Henry


Greame, Major P. Lloyd
Neal, Arthur
Wood, Major Hon. E. (Ripon)


Greenwood, Colonel Sir Hamar
Nicholson, R. (Doncaster)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, W.)


Greig, Colonel James William
Nicholson, W. (Petersfield)
Yate, Colonel Charles Edward


Guinness, Lt.-Col. Hon. W. E.(B. St. E.)
Norton-Griffiths, Lt.-Colonel Sir J.
Yeo, Sir Alfred William


Hacking, Colonel D. H.
O'Neill, Captain Hon. Robert W. H.
Young, Lt.-Com. E. H. (Norwich)


Hailwood, A.
Palmer, Major G. M. (Jarrow)



Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir Fred (Dulwich)
Palmer, Brig.-Gen. G. (Westbury)
TELLESS FOR THE AYES.— Captain


Hambro, Angus Valdemar
Parker, James
F. Guest and Lord E. Talbot.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. William
Griffiths, T. (Pontypool)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigen)


Barnes, Major H. (Newcastle, E.)
Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)
Redmond, Captain William A.


Bell, James (Ormskirk)
Hallas, E.
Richardson, R. (Houghton)


Benn, Captain W. (Leith)
Harbison, T. J. S.
Rose, Frank H.


Bramsdon, Sir T.
Hartshorn, V.
Short, A. (Wednesbury)


Briant, F.
Hayday, A.
Swan, J. E. C.


Cairns, John
Hirst, G. H.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)


Cape, Tom
Hogge, J. M.
Thorne, W. (Plaistow)


Carter, W. (Mansfield)
Kelly, Edward J. (Donegal, E.)
Tootill. Robert


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kenyon, Barnet
Waterson, A. E.


Crooks, Rt. Hon. William
Kiley, James Daniel
Williams. A. (Consett. Durham)


Davies, Alfred (Clitheroe)
Lawson, John
Wilson. W. T. (Westhoughton)


Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)
Maciean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Wood, Maj. Mackenzie (Aberdeen, C.)


Devlin, Joseph
Murrey, Dr. D. (Western Isles)



Edwards, C. (Bedwellty)
Newbould, A, E.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Glanville, Harold James
O'Connor, T. P.
Mr. MacVeagh and Commander Kenworthy,


Graham, W. (Edinburgh)
Onions, Alfred



First Resolution read a second time.

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.— [15Th DECEMBER.]

Resolutions reported,

AIR ESTIMATES, 1919–20.

1. That a sum, not exceeding £3,518,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Pay, etc., of His Majesty's Air Force, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, in addition to the sum of £17,533,000 to be allocated for this purpose from the sum of £45,000,000 voted on account of Air Services generally.
2. That a sum, not exceeding £1,020,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Quartering, Stores (except Technical), Supplies, Animals, and Transport of the Air Force, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, in addition to a sum of £5,083,000 to be allocated for this purpose from the sum of £45,000,000 voted on account of Air Services generally.
3. That a sum not exceeding £3,229,850, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Technical and Warlike Stores, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, in addition to a sum of £16,093,000 to be allocated for this purpose from the sum of £45,000,000 voted on account of Air Services generally.
4. That a sum, not exceeding £1,070,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Expense of the Works, Buildings, Repairs, and Lands of the Air Force, including Civilian Staff and other charges connected therewith, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, in addition to a sum of £5,332,000 to be allocated for this purpose from the sum of £45,000,000 voted on account of Air Services generally.
5. That a sum, not exceeding £116,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Air Ministry which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, in addition to a sum of £576,000 to be allocated for this purpose from the sum of £45,000,000 voted on account of Air Services nerally.
6. That a sum, not exceeding £34,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Miscellaneous Effective Services of the Air Force, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, in addition to a sum of £169,000 to be allocated for this purpose from the sum of £45,000,000 voted on account of Air Services generally.
7. That a sum, not exceeding £43,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Rewards, Half-pay, Retired Pay, Widows, Pensions, and other Non-Effective Services of the Air Force, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, in addition to a sum of £214,000, to be allocated for this purpose from the sum of £45,000,000 voted on account of Air Services generally.

ARMY ESTIMATES AND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1919–20.

8. That an additional number of Land Forces, not exceeding 100,000, all ranks, be maintained for the Service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland at Home and Abroad, excluding His Majesty's Indian Possessions, for the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920.

9. That a sum, not exceeding £5,000,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charges for Army Services which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, in respect of an estimated net total cost of £424,733,000, and of liabilities outstanding on the first day of the year.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House cloth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: May I ask for your guidance? I wish to ask the Minister for Air a question regarding the distribution of force as laid down in the letter of the head of the Air Force, and I would like to know on which Vote the question can be raised. Yesterday, by special arrangement, the general discussion took place at the beginning, and I attempted to raise this question on Vote 5 for the Air Ministry. I would like to ask what procedure you think would be best for the House to adopt on the Report stage of these Estimates?

Mr. SPEAKER: The distribution of the Air Force?

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Yes, staff work.

Mr. SPEAKER: That really ought to come on the Vote for the Air Ministry. I take it that they are responsibile for the distribution of the Air Force.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Then we can discuss only those items for which money is requested in each Vote, and the question of policy can only be raised on Vote 5 for the Air Ministry?

Mr. SPEAKER: Yes.

Mr. HOGGE: Yesterday we discussed, among other things, the question of the gratuity which was payable to men as distinct from officers. If my right hon. Friend will look at Vote I, he will see that there are two figures which illustrate the point of criticism which has been made frequently in the House. Section G deals with service gratuities of officers and men on discharge. The amount allowed for
officers is no less a sum than 23,000,000, whereas the gratuities made to non-commissioned officers and men amount only to £2,100,000. Although I am not so familiar with the Air Force as with other sections of the Army, I have always understood that there is a larger proportion of men to officers in the Air Force than in the Regular Army, and that for the purpose of flying officers you require to keep a very large number of men on the ground and attached to the workshops connected with the production and effective maintenance of flying machines. I would like to ask my right hon. Friend if he can tell us what number of officers this £3,000,000 represents as compared with the number of men represented by the £2,100,000. My right hon. Friend will remember that the gratuity which is paid to officers is on the basis of 124 days' pay for the first year of service, and sixty-two days' pay for every subsequent year of service, whereas in the case of the men it is a fixed sum of £5 for the first year of service, with 10s. per month for each subsequent year of service, or £6 for the second, third and fourth years, or whatever years may have been served. I have raised this question before and I do not want to go over the old arguments again, but it is obvious to anyone that the bases upon which the two gratuities are paid are unjust, and that if the right hon. Gentleman were to pay gratuity to non-commissioned officers and men on the basis of the days they have served their gratuity would he very much higher than it is. I notice that a deputation of discharged and demobilised men waited on the Prime Minister and put before him this very point, applicable to the whole of the Services, and they were informed that there was no hope of a change being made. I suppose the reason was the constant urging of economy in national expenditure, and from that point of view there would be no reply if there were nothing relevant in the arguments that could be put forward. When one remembers what very large sums arc being expended in other directions, I think it is right on the part of those who agree with the point of view that I am putting to put up this claim for the men. For instance, I read the other day in the prospectus of an iron and steel company that the Ministry of Munitions advanced up to the end of June no less than £500,000, and that they were still pledged to another £500,000. It is a company of which one Member of this
House is a director. One million of public money is to be advanced to that concern in order that what they did in the War in providing munitions may be carried through now that war has ceased. That is to say, a wealthy corporation has got £500,000 of public money and is entitled to get still another £500,000 to enable it to carry on this extraordinary business which was created during the War. The same, surely, is applicable to the men who have served The right hon. Gentleman knows the operations of the Civil Liabilities Committee. The maximum amount a man can receive to enable him to start in business in this country is £104. When you compare that grant with the amount of money wasted in creating this new business I think there is a just claim on the part of the serving sailor and soldier for his gratuity on the same basis as that of officers. However expensive it may be, and however great may be the demand made upon the income of the State, it is still true that this is probably the one expenditure remaining in connection with our war expense after demobilisation which has not yet been quite fairly met. I have no doubt that the right hon. Gentleman will take up the same position as he has taken up before, because it is the Government's position, but so long as we have the opportunity I certainly intend to press the claim of the men for a war service gratuity on the same basis as the officers.

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Churchill): The hon. Gentleman knows that the rates of gratuity for officers and for men and the conditions under which they are earned have been fixed by Parliament after the Government had made proposals to Parliament. There is no change in these rates. The enormous bulk of these gratuities for officers and men have already been paid. There is no question whatever of revising them. We have just completed the payment of over £73,000,000 sterling in gratuities to the Army, and another sum, which I have not in mind—probably over £5,000,000—to the Royal Air Force, and it is quite impossible to reopen the subject. Only last night the hon. Member's colleagues on the Opposition side were declaiming against the great expense of the Army and the Air Force in time of peace. Now the hon. Gentleman gets up and proposes to embark on a course which is thoroughly unreasonable and would involve a great deal
of additional expense. He draws attention to the disproportionate amount earned by officers as compared with men. These payments are strictly according to scale. Of course, in the Army the proportion of officers to men was nothing like so high as in the Air Force. There were nearly 25,000 officers in the Air Force at the conclusion of hostilities. I do not think the number of men exceeded 200,000, so that there was one officer to about eight men. It has also to be remembered that most of the dangerous flying was necessarily done by the commissioned ranks, and I am certain that the House will not grudge the flying officers the gratuities given to them.

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: Perhaps it would be convenient if I asked at this stage whether the right hon. Gentleman could make any statement about the policy of the Ministry as regards pilot certificates and the non-commissioned ranks. As the House knows, the practice in the French and Italian Flying Corps was more and more that the non-commissioned ranks actually controlled the machines while the officers were the observers and general commanders of the machines. In the Naval Air Service and in the Royal Flying Corps the practice was the reverse. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to indicate generally to the House what the policy of the Ministry is, whether he intends, to encourage sergeant-pilots or whether he thinks that the whole of the actual flying should continue to be clone by commissioned officers.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I have already exhausted my right of intervention on this subject. We are no longer in Committee.

Mr. E. KELLY: I think that in the case of the Air Estimates the House is rather at a disadvantage, and I quite recognise, too, that the right hon. Gentleman is at a disadvantage in explaining them to the House, and consequently for this year, at any rate, it may be necessary for the right hon. Gentleman to enter somewhat more fully into explanations than would be the case, because in pre-war days, in dealing with Estimates like these, we had a fairly steady number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men to deal with, and, consequently, any rate of increase which did exist was a fairly constant one; but in regard to this year we are dealing with a force which varies from 150,000 at the beginning of the year to 35,000 at the end
of the year. What I want the right hon. Gentleman to explain is: How does he arrive at the average number throughout the year 1919–1920 which is given in respect of each sub-head of the Votes? For in. stance, I want information in regard to the number of officers under "Pay," which is given in the first column on page 6. The first average number given is the average number of officers. Is that average the actual number in service at the end of the year, or is it an average between the numbers serving at the beginning of the year and those serving at the end of the year? The point is particularly important when we come to the numbers of the Women's Royal Air Force, which are given as 9,450. Will the right hon. Gentleman indicate what the numbers of the Women's Royal Air Force will be at the end of the year? Another point on which the right hon. Gentleman might give us some explanation is the large Vote, over £1,500,000, for civil employment. How much money will be paid out, say, weekly or monthly, at the end of the year in respect of that Force, because I think it is very bad policy for a large Department to pay out such sums, and that it is very desirable that a Force like the Royal Air Force, which includes within itself large numbers of men belonging to skilled trades, should not he so reliant on civil employés, and that it should not be necessary to submit to this House so large a Vote for civil employés for services which might well be rendered by members of the Royal Air Force itself.
There is an item, also, in the Vote of £450,000 miscellaneous receipts. That is a very considerable item, and we would like some further information from the right hon. Gentleman with regard to it. Can he tell us from what sources those miscellaneous receipts are derived, and whether they are likely to increase or diminish? I do not know if I would be in order in referring to the question of the Headquarters Staff of the Air Force in Ireland. It seems to me that the Headquarters Staff have been without a permanent home or location in Ireland, and I would like to know, are they to be quartered in the ordinary military barracks which are now occupied by military forces, or are they to have special buildings provided for their accommodation?

Mr. SPEAKER: The question of the disposition of the forces does not arise under this Vote, which is in relation to pay.

Mr. KELLY: Would I not be able to raise the point as to the number of officers serving in any particular location in Ireland on this Vote?

Mr. SPEAKER: Not on this Vote.
Notice taken that forty Members were not present; House counted, and forty Members being found present—

Mr. KELLY (resuming): In deference to your ruling that I cannot raise the question of the location of the Staff on this Vote, I do not propose to refer to it any further now, but hope to do so subsequently.

Mr. DEVLIN: The opportunity which this Debate allords ought to be taken advantage of by everyone who is interested in. the forces of the Crown. I myself am profoundly interested in the efficiency of the forces of the Crown, and the Air Service, I suppose, will be one of the most vital of those forces in the future. Indeed, I am much more interested in. it than I was before, because I understand that now the complete control of the Air Service is in the hands of the military authorities. Why that is so I do not know. I am not an expert on these matters. I have listened to the expert opinions of very eminent politicians in this House on the subject of the Air Force, and I was deeply impressed by what they told us. They said that the War Office was not the proper authority to guide the Air Service.

Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise on this Vote, which refers to the question of pay.

Mr. DEVLIN: I want to know what is the pay of those members of the Air Service who are engaged in war work in Ireland. If they are part, of the military government in that country, we want to know what extra pay is gven to them for the onerous and arduous duties they are called upon to discharge in the pursuit of law and order and of good government and of the destruction of Irish national sentiment.

Mr. SPEAKER: Those questions do not arise on this Vote. I must warn the hon. Member, and I have twice called him to order.

Mr. DEVLIN: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what is the cost of the Air Service in Ireland, and how many men are engaged in air work in Ireland? A little while ago the right hon. Gentleman, rather flippantly, I thought, made the
suggestion that it was of no consequence to the right hon. Gentleman or to any member of the Government as to what occurs in Ireland. The worst that can occur there is the best that can occur here—that seems to be the mentality of the members of the Government. What extra pay is given to the men of the Air Force for doing war work in Ireland?

Captain REDMOND: I desire to ask one or two questions on this Vote. In reply to a question this afternoon the right hon. Gentleman stated that there were considerably less officers now in the Air Force than there were before the Armistice. The question we are discussing now is the amount of pay given to the officers, and I think it is only right that the right hon. Gentleman should inform the House of the number of officers in the force. Large numbers of those highly trained, efficient and skilled pilots have been dispensed with, and, I think, wrongfully at present, because everyone knows that the future of the Air Force is most important, especially war were to break out to-morrow, which, of course, we would all deplore. In such a war the Air Force would certainly play a most important part Therefore, it would be interesting to the Members of the House and the public generally to know the number of officers and the rate of pay and allowances made to them. I am perfectly well aware we are not allowed to enter on the question of policy at this stage, but it is known to everyone what a colossal mistake has been made once more by the Government in this, as in every other Department, in deciding that the Air Force should not be an independent body.

Mr. SPEAKER: I have already pointed out that that question does not arise on this Vote, and I must ask the hon. Member to confine his observations to the Vote we are now discussing.

Captain REDMOND: I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to tell us the numbers and also to give us some particulars as to the Women's Royal Air Force. I do not know very much about the Women's Royal Air Force. I do not know whether it exists in my own country or not. I do not know how many women there are in the Air Force there, and it would be very interesting to get particulars on these matters from the right hon. Gentleman. There is no doubt at all that the whole question of the future of the Air Force
in this country is of very deep and vital concern to everyone in the country, and I feel that this Vote should not be taken without a fuller explanation than that which has already been given.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I can only speak again on this Vote by leave of the House.

Mr. DEVLIN: We are all delighted to hear you again.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The particulars asked for as to the rates of pay of every branch of the Service will be found in the Royal Warrant. The numbers were provided for under Vote A, and I do not think it will be useful for me to try to take up the time of the House in making a statement as to figures which can be obtained by recourse to the ordinary publications. As to the Air Force in Ireland, the picking out of figures would take time. I have given such calculations in regard to the military in Ireland, and I should be quite ready to have such a calculation made in regard to the part of the Air Force in Ireland. It is not a thing which I could do by mental arithmetic, but if a question is put down I will give a reply. As to the Appropriation-in-Aid I will make inquiries. A question has been asked as to civil employ´s in the Air Force. It is somewhat cheaper to employ civil employ´s, not because the actual wages are smaller, but because the military paraphernalia of the establishment costs over and above what the civil establishment does. For that reason we are employing a proportion of civil employ´s at the store depots and some of the repair depots, and I am sure that a good case can be made out for that. Of course many of those civilian employes are ex-Service men. The Women's Royal Air Force, which was about 30,000 when the War was on, is now down to a little more than 200, and that number is absolutely essential for the ordinary duties of cooks in certain out of the way Air Force stations. We found it convenient to continue that

practice at the present time. The number here, 9,450, is, of course, the average through the year, obtained by dividing the number of days in the year into the total number on each particular day, and a similar method has been adopted in regard to both the two items A and B. The average figures do not mean the numbers that we have at the present time nor the numbers which we are reducing down to, but the average borne on these Votes throughout the year. I rather deprecate making any final statement in regard to promotion from the ranks until the Air Estimates for next year are introduced. Then the scheme will be shown in much fuller detail, but, broadly speaking, we are going to provide means by which men may enter the ranks of the Air Force and may rise to be flying officers, but we will, I think, in the future as in the past, relegate the conduct of the flying machines in the main to commissioned officers.

Mr. DEVLIN: What about the extra pay given for war service in Ireland?

Mr. CHURCHILL: There is no extra pay given to officers and men serving in Ireland at the present time. Service in Ireland is not unpopular. The Irish stations are popular stations with the British Army, and there are no conditions of active service in regard to their accommodation and rations and so forth, which should justify them in being given extra pay.

Mr. DEVLIN: Will you give them anything extra for pursuing the funeral of a Nationalist?

Mr. CHURCHILL: No, it is not usual to make extra payment for showing respect to the dead in any country.
Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

The House divided: Ayes, 188; Noes, 45.

Division No. 158.]
AYES.
[4.46 p.m.


Adair, Rear-Admiral
Betterton, H. B.
Carew, Charles R. S. (Tiverton)


Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte
Bird, Alfred
Carr, W. T.


Allen, Col. William James
Blake, Sir Francis Douglas
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.


Archdale, Edward M.
Brassey, H. L. C.
Casey, T. W.


Astor, Viscountess
Briggs, Harold
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord R. (Hitchin)


Baird, John Lawrence
Brittain, Sir Harry E.
Chamberlain, N. (Birm., Ladywood)


Baldwin, Stanley
Brown, Captain D. C. (Hexham)
Cheyne, Sir William Watson


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.


Barrand, A. R.
Burden, Colonel Rowland
Clay, Captain H. H. Spender


Barton, Sir William (Oldham)
Burn, Captain C. R. (Torquay)
Clough, R.


Baton, Com. Ian Hamilton (Greenwich)
Burn, T. H. (Belfast)
Coats, Sir Stuart


Benn, Captain W. (Leith)
Campion, Colonel W. R.
Cockerill, Brig.-General G. K.


Colvin, Brig. -General R. B.
Hope, John Deans (Berwick)
Rae, H. Norman


Courthope, Major George Loyd
Hopkinson, Austin (Mossley)
Raeburn, Sir William


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish University)
Hughes, Spencer Leigh
Ramsden, G. T.


Craig, Captain Charles C. (Antrim)
Hunter, Gen. Sir Archibald (Lancaster)
Remnant, Colonel Sir James


Craig, Col. Sir James (Dcwn, Mid.)
Hurd, p. A.
Roberts, Sir S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Inskip, T. W. H.
Robinson, S. (Brecon and Radnor)


Curzon, Commander Viscount
Jackson, Lt.-Col. Hon. F. S. (York)
Rodger, A. K.


Davies, Alfred Thomas (Lincoln)
Jephcott, A. R.
Roundell, Lt -Colonel R. F.


Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)
Jenett, William Morgan
Rowlands, James


Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)
Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen)
Rutherford, Col. Sir J. (Darwen)


Denniss, E. R. Bartley (Oldham)
Kidd, James
Samuel, A. M. (Farnham, Surrey)


Dixon, Captain H.
Law, A.J. (Rochdale)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Norwood)


Dockrell, Sir M.
Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Glasgow)
Sanders, Colonel Robert A.


Doyle, N. Grattan
Lindsay, William Arthur
Seddon, James


Duncannon, Viscount
Lister, Sir R. Ashton
Seely, Major-General Rt. Hon. John


Du Pre, Colonel W. B.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Shaw, Hon. A. (Kilmarnock)


Edge, Captain William
Lynn, R. J.
Smith, Sir Allan


Edwards, J. H. (Glam., Neath)
Macdonald, Rt. Hon. J. M. (Stirling)
Smithers, Sir Alfred W.


Elliot, Captain W. E. (Lanark)
Macmaster, Donald
Stanier, Captain Sir Beville


Eyres-Monsell, Commander B. M.
McMicking, Major Gilbert
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. (Preston)


Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James l.
Stephenson, Colonel H. K.


Fell, Sir Arthur
Macquisten, F. A.
Stewart, Gershom


FitzRoy, Captain Hon. Edward A.
Magnus, Sir Philip
Sturrock, J. Long


Foreman, H.
Mallalieu, Frederick William
Sugden, Lieut. W. H.


Forestier-Walker, L.
Malone, Major P. (Tottenham)
Sutherland, Sir William


Ganzoni, Captain F. C.
Matthews, David
Sykes, Col. Sir A. J. (Knutsford)


Gardiner, J. (Perth and Kinross)
Middlebrook, Sir William
Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempstead)


Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham
Moles, Thomas
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell- (M'yhl.)


Gilbert, James Daniel
Molson, Major John Elsdale
Thorpe, Captain John Henry


Gilmour, Lt. -Colonel John
Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C.
Townley, Maximilian G.


Glyn, Major R.
Morison, T. B. (Inverness)
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Gaff, Sir Park
Morrison, H. (Salisbury)
Waddington. R.


Goulding, Rt. Hon. Sir E. A.
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.
Wallace, J.


Grant, James Augustus
Mount, William Arthur
Ward, Col. J. (Stoke, Trent)


Greenwood. Colonel Sir Hamar
Murray, Lt.-col- Hon. A. C. (Aberdeen)
Wardle, George J.


Greame, Major P. Lloyd
Murray, Hon. G. (St. Rollox)
Waring, Major Walter


Greig, Colonel James William
Murray, William (Dumfries)
Weigall, Lt.-Colonel W. E. G. A.


Gretton, Colonel John
Nail, Major Joseph
Whitla, Sir William


Gritten, W. G. Howard
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. (Exeter)
Williams, Lt.-Com. C. (Tavistock)


Hacking, Colonel D. H.
Nicholson, R. (Doncaster)
Wilson. Col. M. (Richmond, Yorks.)


Hailwood, A.
Nicholson, W. (Petersfield)
Wood, Major Hon. E. (Ripon)


Hambro, Angus Valdemar
Palmer, Major G. M. (Jarrow)
Wood. Sir H. K. (Woolwich, W.)


Hanna, G. B.
Palmer, Brig.-Gen. G. (Westbury)
Wood. Sir J. (Stalybridge and Hyde)


Hanson, Sir Charles
Parker, James
Yate, Col. Charles Edward


Harmsworth, Cecll R. (Luton, Beds.)
pearce, Sir William
Yeo, Sir Allred William


Haslam, Lewis
Peel, Col. Hon. S. (Uxbridge, Mddx.)
Young, Lt.-Com. E. H. (Norwich)


Hennessy, Major G.
Perkins, Walter Frank
Young, William (Perth and Kinross)


Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.)
pownall, Lt.-Col. Assheton
Younger, Sir George


Hewart, Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon
Pratt, John William



Hilder, Lt.-Colonel F.
Prescott, Major W. H.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Lord E.


Hoare, Lt.-Colonel Sir Samuel J. G.
Purchase, H. G.
Talbot and Captain F. Guest.


Hope, Lt.-Col. Sir J. (Midlothian)




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. William
Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Barnes, Major H. (Newcastle, E.)
Hallas, E.
Richardson. R. (Houghton)


Bell, James (Ormskirk)
Hancock, John George
Rose. Frank H.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. C. W.
Harbison, T. J. S.
Short, A. (Wednesbury)


Bramsdon, Sir T.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Widnes)
Swan, J. E. C.


Briant, F.
Hirst, G. H.
Thorne, G. R. (Woiverhampton)


Cairns. John
Hogge, J. M.
Thorne, W. (Plaistow)


Cape, Tom
Kelly, Edward J. (Donegal, E.)
Tootill, Robert


Carter, W. (Mansfield)
Kenworthy, Lieut. -Commander
Walsh, S. (Ince, Lanes.)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kenyon, Barnet
Waterson, A. E.


Davies, Alfred (Clitheroe)
Lawson, John
Williams. A. (Consett, Durham)


Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Williams, Col. Penry (Mlddlesbro, E.)


Edwards, C. (Bedwellty)
MacVeagh, Jeremiah
Wood, Major Mackenzie (Aberdeen, C.)


Glanville, Harold James
Murray, Dr. D. (Western Isles)



Griffiths, T. (Pontypool)
Newbould, A. E.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Guest, J. (Hemswwth, York)
Onions, Alfred
Mr. Devlin and Captain Redmond,


Second Resolution read a second time.

SUPPLIES AND TRANSPORT (AIR SERVICE).

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution.

Major BARNES: There is an item in this Vote which includes payments made for
buildings taken under the. Defence of the Realm Regulations and compensation for damage, and I want to ask whether it is under this Vote that any payments made in respect of the land belonging to Lord Rosebery and the buildings on it are effected, or whether that comes under

Mr. CHURCHILL: It comes under Vote 3.

5.0 P.M.

Mr. E. KELLY: It is unfair to ask the right hon. Gentleman to carry in his head the details of a great many of these sub heads, and I recognize the difficulty he is placed in, but a contract which is made for the hire of a building is an important point, because people were willing to acquiesce in any action the authorities generally wished to take when war was on, but now that war is over and these buildings are being handed back to the previous owners, the particular contract between the owner and the War Office is of considerable importance. If the War Office and Air Force, for instance, had taken over a lengthy tenancy it would consequently increase the financial burden, which would be unnecessary if they were able to surrender the buildings at once. Further, there is a very great shortage of buildings in every city, and I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will see that buildings at present utilised by the Air Force should be handed over as soon as possible to the previous owners, giving the longest possible notice. There is also the consideration that, spread about, as all the buildings are, it must result in the work being done in an unsatisfactory way. A saving under this head might be affected if the right hon. Gentleman took steps to give up all these buildings, and to apply the money to housing in one building all the various Departments of the Air Ministry in a particular district or city. With regard to Item 2 of Sub-head C—scavenging, sanitary services, window-cleaning, etc., £26,000—will the right hon. Gentleman inform us whether these various services are done by the Royal Air Force or by outside contractors? If they are done by outside contractors, it might be possible to effect some considerable saving by forcing men to do these manual services in lieu of punishment, because in such a large force as the Air Force there must be a considerable number of punishments from day to day. If that suggestion were carried out, it would be a benefit both to the Royal Air Force and certainly to the public service, if it meant a reduction of this item of £26,000. There is the very large sum of £2,150,000 for clothing of the Royal Air Force, and a sum of £45,000 for clothing for the Women's Royal Force. I cannot help thinking that a portion of this very large sum is due to the fact that the uniforms for the Royal Air Force have been changed
from time to time. I think within the last twelve months the uniform has been changed twice. These changes, of course, must involve an increased charge upon the public purse. If the right hon. Gentleman can satisfy us on these points, it will go far to meet us.

Captain W. BENN: There is a point we did not raise in Committee—namely, Sub-head J, Medical Services. All medical authorities, I think, hold that there should be a separate medical service for the Air Force. In February last year there was a discussion on the subject, and the hon. and gallant Gentleman who was then in charge of the Air Force (Major Baird), speaking of this separate medical service for the Air Force, said that the difficulty was that
the Army felt that the setting up at this moment of a fresh and altogether separate Medical Service might lead to friction and trouble."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 21st February, 1918, col. 962, Vol. 103.]
It was this friction which, incidentally, was at the root of some of our objections to the joint office, but the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Sir W. Cheyne) made a very interesting speech—of course he speaks with the highest authority in this matter—pointing out that the pathological problems connected with the Air Force were absolutely different from those of diseases of people who worked on the ground. He pointed out the vast difference made by the constant change in height. He said that many people suffered from mountain sickness when climbing great heights, whereas, of course, anyone in an air machine might come down 20,000 feet to the ground in a very few minutes, and that that was a problem which obviously required special study by medical science. The hon. Baronet spoke also the importance in the air of a true binocular vision. I am not an expert, but I see hon. Members who are, and it is quite obvious that, in juging distance, a true binocular vision is very important, and scientists tell us we get the sense of the third dimension through having two eyes.

Mr. SPEAKER: This Vote refers to binoculars, but not to binocular vision.

Captain BENN: Would I be in order in referring to the apparatus supplied to the Air Force for the purpose of medical inspection? It is a point about which I should like to have some information.

Mr. SPEAKER: That point seems to me to be covered, so far as I understand it, under the term "Medical Stores and Supplies, including cost of medicine, surgical instruments and requisites." It comes within those, certainly.

Captain BENN: I shall, of course, be obedient to your ruling. I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has in mind the items of equipment? The hon. and gallant Gentleman to whom I have referred was perfectly specific in his pledge to this House. He said that
After the War it must be obvious that a separate Medical Service for the Air Service is bound to come."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 21st February, 1918, col. 1052, Vol. 103.]
That implies, of course, a separate medical equipment, and, in relation to that, there is the important question of the medical test of those who volunteer for the Air Force. The French and Italians have done a great deal of work in this direction. At Padua there is a very large laboratory for the purpose of instituting very accurate tests in respect of people who apply for commissions in the air service. A very important point is the rapidity with which reaction is given to a stimulus, because the moment a man sees the enemy he has to do his best to get out of the way or put himself in a position of attack. I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman how far the work of Colonel Flack is being encouraged under this head—that is, the work of attempting, by means of definite scientific tests, to ascertain some standards by which a person's qualifications for service in this force can be measured? It is a very fruitful and very interesting subject about which we should like to hear what the right hon. Gentleman is doing. If he can also deal with the pledge given in the House to which I have referred he will go a good way to reassure those interested in the subject.

Mr. HOGGE: There are two questions I should like to ask with regard to this Vote. Under Sub-head A, Hire of Buildings, there is a sum of £190,000 for probable charges. Does that mean in respect of the hire of buildings which were taken under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, because the amount would seem to suggest that it includes compensation for buildings? I should like to know whether these buildings are to become a permanent habitation of the Air Force? With regard to Sub-head L, Appropriations-in-
Aid, I notice that Sub-heads E to F are for the amount of £545,000. I should rather like to know how this sum has been obtained, because I do not see how you could get very much from F unless there has been a sale of clothing in both the Royal Air Force and the Women's Air Force. Looking at E, I do not see how much could be obtained out of the first of those items. I am rather interested to know what has been sold to bring in these large revenues, and, if it has been done out of these two items, what kind of reduction will follow, because obviously further sales will take place.

Mr. DEVLIN: I should like some information with respect to the item of £1,000 put down for the purchase and upkeep of horses, etc. What have horses to do with the Air Force? Is this for the carriages of the officers? The item also includes the cost of veterinary medicines and appliances. The right hon. Gentleman, I am sure, will be able to enlighten us as to what this means. It seems a substantial outlay for the purpose.

Captain REDMOND: Before this Vote is taken I think it would be well if the right hon. Gentleman could inform the House and the country whether the Government have yet decided upon the particular nature of the clothing of the Royal Air Force. I notice that Item F refers to clothing, and the figure is £2,195,000. As everyone knows, the clothing of the Royal Air Force has been decided, I suppose, in half a dozen different ways during the last few years. We do not know yet whether the Royal Air Force will wear khaki or blue. The officers of the Air Force are at least entitled to know where they stand in this regard. At one moment they are told they have to purchase a certain uniform of a certain colour and texture. The next moment they are told they must put this to one side, because the authorities have determined that they want the Royal Air Force to be a unit separate from the Army and Navy and that it is to be garbed in some beautiful royal firmanent blue. This is a consideration for the officers of the Air Force. To my knowledge and to the right hon. Gentleman's knowledge officers of that unit are not people of the same means as those who were in the Army before the War. They are men who are quite up to the standard as to brains, ability, youth, and integrity. They have proved their worth during the last three or four years. It is not because
these young men have social power or bank balances that they are in the Air Force. That being so, it is necessary that these young men should be told at once where they stand in regard to uniform. I should like the right hon. Gentleman to explain to the House what is the meaning of this £2,195,000 Vote which we are now asked to carry for the clothing of the Royal Air Force.
With regard to the points which have been raised by my hon. Friend near me (Mr. Devlin) as to the question of horses, we are asked for £1,000 for the charges and upkeep of horses appertaining to the Royal Air Force. Have any of these horses been purchased in Ireland? What price has been paid for them? Furthermore, I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman, and we are entitled to know, why the Air Force authorities have gone out of their way to buy. horses and not mules; and what is meant in regard to the medical services referred to and the hospital charges in respect to the Army and civil hospitals of £150,000 Has the right hon. Gentleman created any new hospitals? Where are these hospitals? Are they in Edinburgh, London, Dublin? All that we are told in this White Paper in relation to the medical services is Item No. 2 Hospital: charges in respect of Army and civil hospitals, £150,000. Is the right hon. Gentleman subsidising existing hospitals? It is treating the House in a very cavalier fashion to put items down in regard to horses and hospitals about which we are told very little. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be able to give a little information upon the subject, and tell us whether he has purchased new horses or provided new hospitals. We want all the information that we can get concerning these new hospitals and the horses. My hon. Friend near me (Mr. Devlin) says, "Asses." We should know whether these horses have been purchased for the Government or whether it is asses for the War Office! It is all very well to ask the House to pass the Vote, without. expounding it or explaining policy, or even telling the House the facts. There is no hon. Member here who knows more about this item than what is put in the White Paper, £1,000 for horses and £150,000 for hospitals. It seems desirable that the right hon. Gentleman should explain exactly what is meant by these headings. If he does that satisfactorily, of course, I am sure he will get his Vote.

Mr. CHURCHILL: There is not the slightest intention on the part of the Government of treating the House in the cavalier fashion suggested. I have endeavoured to satisfy the many questioners who have addressed questions to me to day, and from such unexpected quarters of the House. The £1,000 alluded to here is for horses required in respect of the area commands. There used to be eight. area commands of the Flying Force it, the United Kingdom in which horses were provided for the officers who had a war staff. We have reduced these areas to two— the inland and the sea-board area. The officers have a pretty wide district to cover. They are often equivalent in rank to a general officer and in respect to the duties they have to discharge, and they have to get over a good deal of ground. Horses have been purchased, not mules or asses.

Mr. DEVLIN: The asses are all at the War Office?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I am not quite sure whether the field over which the assesroam is not wider than that. Observations like that carry one back to one's early school-days, when jokes of the kind about the possession of asinine qualities by particular individuals were expected to pass muster; but I am really surprised that the hon. Gentleman should have fallen back upon it. So far as the medical services are concerned, the £150,000 is required to pay the hospitals on account of the disbursements to which they had been put. An airman ill or injured, where there is no other hospital, is taken to the nearest civilian hospital, and, of course, the bill comes in to us in due course.

Captain REDMOND: They are existing hospitals?

Mr. CHURCHILL: We are not building any new hospitals. On the contrary, the process this year has been the closing of hospitals on an enormous scale. The question of the appropriations-in-aid was referred to by, I think, the hon. Gentleman opposite. The sub-head he asked about refers to the rebate in the price of wool which has been arrived at. The story is a rather complicated one, and there is no need perhaps to go into it now. But the price of wool charged to the Air Force has been subject to a rebate and this accounts for the reduction. Then about the clothing. The hon. Gentleman was surprised that £45,000 should be spent on clothing for the
Woman's Royal Air Force. Attention has already been drawn to the fact that this average for 9,000 women only works out at £5 per head, and that does not seem to me to be excessive for the requirements of a considerable number of females.

Mr. KELLY: Is it not £9 a head?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I am not strong at arithmetic, but I think that, as a matter of fact, five nines are 45.

Mr. KELLY: I beg the right hon. Gentleman's pardon, I am wrong.

Mr. CHURCHILL: Yes; I know. The hon. Member's intervention makes me wonder whether we ought not to hurry up over this Debate, and get on to the Education Bill.

Mr. DEVLIN: War Office first!

Mr. CHURCHILL: Then a word as to the clothing of the men of the Royal Air Force. In the middle of the War when the Air Force was formed into a separate unit a new uniform of khaki was adopted. Now that the War is over it has been decided to make another change. It has been thought desirable to have a more modest and a more sober-hued cloth. It shows, however, the distinctive character of its design. This involves no additional expense, because we make the strictest rule that every officer has to wear out his old clothing, even the original khaki, before he adopts the new pattern. It is quite easy for the Air Farce to do that, because they can keep their old uniform for the dirty oily work which has to be done in regard to aeroplanes.

Captain REDMOND: What will the new uniform be like?

Mr. CHURCHILL: It is better seen than described, and is very much admired.

Lieut.-Colonel ALLEN: Is there any of this money for the officers?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I am coming to that. No waste has been incurred. This item arises in consequence of a change from the War Office, and it is a sum drawn by the

Royal Air Force during the War. The hon Member for Leith (Captain Bonn) referred to the special apparatus used for testing the efficiency of pilots. I have no reason to believe that the apparatus we have for this purpose in the Royal Air Force is in any way inferior to any apparatus in use in any other Air Force in the world. Nevertheless we shall do everything we can to keep such apparatus up to the highest possible level which the medical authorities can suggest. I can quite see that the medical service of the Royal Air Force, even if it should not be separated from the general medical service, must be a highly specialised branch, because the conditions require special aptitude, and we are all acquainted with the effect which flying produces on officers and men, and this makes it necessary that the medical service dealing with them should have had a specialised study of those conditions. Therefore I fully recognise that it must be a special branch of the medical service.

With regard to the contracts for the purchase of articles required by the medical service, they are purchased wholesale in order that the different Departments of State are not bidding against each other in a limited market, and this is done in order that the best conditions of wholesale purchase can obtain. Under item (c), Barrack Services and sanitary services, these are done by contract where the Royal Air Force personnel are not available, but where they are available they keep their own barracks clean in the ordinary way. Item (a) deals with the compensation paid for buildings taken under the Defence of the Realm Act. These are buildings taken at short notice, but in the main we have obtained our buildings under the Defence of the Realm Act, and in those cases the House is quite familiar with the process by which these claims are assessed and appealed against, and it is not necessary for me to embark upon this subject at any length. I trust I have now offered to the House a reasonable explanation of the points which have been raised.

Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

The House divided: Ayes; 203; Noes, 45.

Division No. 159.]
AYES.
[5.35 p. m.


Adair, Rear-Admiral
Atkey, A. R.
Barton. Sir William (Oldham)


Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte
Baird, John Lawrence
Benn, Com. lan Hamilton (Greenwich)


Allen, Lt.-Col. William James
Baldwin, Stanley
Benn, Captain W. (Leith)


Archdale, Edwald M.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Bennett, T. J.


Astor. Viscountess
Barrand, A. R.
Blake, Sir Francis Douglas


Bowyer, Captain G. W. E.
Greenwood, Colonel Sir Hamar
Pearce, Sir William


Brassey, H. L. C.
Gretton, Colonel John
Perkins, Walter Frank


Breese, Major Charles
Gritten, W. G. Howard
Pinkham, Lt.-Colonel Charles


Briggs, Harold
Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (Leic., Loughboro')
Pollock, Sir Ernest M.


Brittain, Sir Harry E.
Hacking, Colonol D. H.
Pownall, Lt.-Col. Assheton


Crown, Captain D. C. (Hexham)
Hailwood, A.
Pratt, John William


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William J.
Hambro, Angus Valdemar
Prescott, Major W. H.


Burden, Colonel Rowland
Hamilton, Major C. G. C. (Altrintham)
Purchase, H, G.


Burn, Captain C. R. (Torquay)
Hancock, John George
Rao, H. Norman


Burn, T. H. (Bellast)
Hanna, G. B.
Rendall, Athelstan


Campion, Colonel W. R.
Hanson, Sir Charles
Ramsden, G. T.


Carew, Charles R. S. (Tiverton)
Haslam, Lewis
Raper, A. Baldwin


Carr, W. T.
Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.)
Raw, Lt.-Colonel Dr. N.


Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.
Hewart, Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon
Rees, Captain J. Tudor


Casey, T. W.
Hilder, Lt.-Colonel F.
Reid, D. D.


Cantley, Henry Strother
Hills, Major J. W. (Durham)
Rendall, Athelstan


Cayzer, Major H. R.
Hoare, Lt.-Colonel Sir Samuel J. G.
Roberts, Sir S. (Sheffield, Eeclesall)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. E. (Aston Manor)
Hope, Lieut-col. Sir J. (Midlothian)
Robinson, S. (Brecon and Radner)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord R. (Hitchin)
Hopkinson, Austin (Messley)
Rodger, A. K.


Chamberlain, N. (Birm., Ladywood)
Hughes, Spencer Leigh
Roundell, Lt.-Colonel R. F.


Cheyne, Sir William Watson
Hunter, Gen. Sir Archibald (Lancaster)
Rowlands, James


Clay, Captain H. H. Spender
Hurd, P. A.
Samuel, A. M. (Farnham, Surrey)


Clough, R.
Inskip, T. W. H.
Sanders, colonel Robert A.


Cockirill, Brig.-General G. K.
Jephcott, A. R.
Seddon, James


Cockerill, Brig. -General R. B.
Jellett, William Morgan
Seely, Major-General Rt. Hon. John


Courthope, Major George Loyd
Jesson, C.
Simm, M. T.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish University)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Smitners, Sir Alfred W.


Craig, Captain Charles C. (Antrim)
Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen)
Stanier, Captain Sir Seville


Craig, Col. Sir James (Down, Mid.)
Kerr-Smiley, Major P.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G, (Preston)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Kidd, James
Stanton, Charles Butt


Crolt, Brig. -General Henry Page
Lambert, Rt. Hon. G.
Stephonson, Colonel H. K.


Davies, Sir Davison (Brlxton)
Law, A. J. (Rochdalo)
Sturrock, J. Long-


Davies, Alfred Thomas (Lincoln)
Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Glasgew)
Sugden, Lieut. W. H.


Davies, T. (Clrencester)
Lindsay, William Arthur
Sutherland, Sir William


Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)
Lister, Sir R. Ashton
Sykes, Col. Sir A. J. (Knutsford)


Davies, M. Vaugnan- (Cardigan)
Lorden, John William
Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempstead)


Dawes, J. A.
Lowe, Sir F. W.
Taylor, J. (Dumbarton)


Dennis, J. W.
Lynn, R. J.
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell- (M'yhl.)


Denniss, E. R. Bartley (Oldham)
Macdonald, Rt. Hon. J. M. (Stirling)
Thorpe, Captain John Henry


Dixon, Captain H.
M'Guffin, Samuel
Townley, Maximilian G.


Dockrell, Sir M.
Macmaster, Donald
Vickers, D.


Duncannon, Viscount
McMlcking, Major Gilbert
Waddington, R.


Du Pre, Colonel W. B.
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Wallace, J.


Edge, Captain William
Macquisten, F. A.
Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)


Edwards, J. H. (Glam., Neath)
Mallalieu, Frederick William
Wardle, George J.


Elliot, Captain W. E. (Lanark)
Malone, Major P. (Tottenham)
Waring, Major Walter


Eyres-Monsell, Commander B. M.
Matthews, David
Welgall, Lt.-Colonel W. E. G. A.


Fails, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Middiebrook, Sir William
Weston, Colonel John W.


Fell, Sir Arthur
Moles, Thomas
Whitla, Sir William


Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Molson, Major John Elsdale
Williams, Lt.-Com. C. (Tavlstock)


FitzRoy, Captain Hon. Edward A.
Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C.
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir M. (Bethnal Gn.)


Foreman, H.
Morison, T. B. (Inverness)
Wilson, Col. M. (Richmond, Yorks.)


Forestier-Walker, L.
Morrison, H. (Salisbury)
Wood, Maior Hon. E. (Ripon)


Foxcrott, Captain C.
Mount, William Arthur
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, W.)


Ganzoni, captain F. C.
Murray, Major C. D. (Edinburgh)
Wood, Sir J. (Stalybridge and Hyde)


Gardiner, J. (Perth and Kinross)
Murray, Hon. G. (St. Rollox)
Yate, Col. Charles Edward


Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham
Murray, William (Dumfries)
Yeo, Sir Alfred William


Gilbert, James Daniel
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. (Exeter)
Young, Lt.-Com. E. H. (Norwich)


Gilmour, Lt.-Colonel John
Nicholson, R. (Doncaster)
Young, William (Perth and Kinross)


Glanville. Harold James
Oman, C. W. C.
Younger, Sir George


Goff, Sir Park
O'Neill, Capt. Hon. Robert W. H.



Gould, J. C.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.— Captain


Goulding, Rt. Hon. Sir E. A.
Palmer, Major G. M. (Jarrow)
F. Guest and Lord E. Talbot.


Grant, James Augustus
Parry, Lt.-Colonel Thomas Henry



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. William
Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton)


Barnes, Major H. (Newcastle, E.)
Hallas, E.
Rose, Frank H.


Bell. James (Ormskirk)
Harbison, T.J. S.
Royce, William Stapleton


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. C. W.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Widnes)
Short, A. (Wednesbury)


Bramsdon, Sir T.
Hickman, Brig. -General Thomas E.
Swan, J. E. C.


Briant, F.
Hirst, G. H.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Bromfield, W.
Hogge, J. M.
Thorne, W. (Plaistow)


Cairns, John
Irving, Dan
Tootill, Robert


Cape, Tom
Kelly, Edward J. (Donegal. E.)
Walsh, S. (Ince, Lanes.)


Carter, W. (Mansfield)
Kenworthy, Lieut-Commander
Waterson, A. E.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kenyon, Barnet
Wignall, James


Davies, Alfred (Clitheroe)
Lawson, John
Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)


Davies, J. E. (Smethwick)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Young, Robert (Newton, Lancs.)


Edwards. C. (Bedwellty)
Newbould, A. E.



Griffiths, T. (Pontypool)
Onions, Alfred
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Guest, J. (Hemsworth, York)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Mr. Devlin and Captain Redmond,


Third Resolution read a second time.

TECHNICAL AND WARLIKE STORES.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: I regret that the Secretary for War and Air is not here, because I wish to raise a question in which I know, judging from an answer he gave to an interrogation of mine recently, interests him very much. It arises under subhead K— "Awards to Inventors, £25,000." In the Debate last night an hon. and gallant Member insisted on the need for encouraging and rewarding properly inventors of new types of aircraft, pointing out that an immense saving might in the long run be effected by that Means. I should like to convey to the right hon. Gentleman the desire for some information with regard to the progress being made with the Helicopter. I want to draw attention to the immense importance of the Helicopter, which is calculated to revolutionise flying. The French Government take the question of the air so seriously that they are not at all backward in encouraging inventors in their country. They voted £4,000 for the purpose of inventions with experiments with this particular method of flight. But my information is that certain sections of the Air Ministry are very lukewarm about this system of flight, and, incredible as it may seem, already in this new Service there is apparent that same sort of spirit which preceded the introduction of steam to replace the old sailing vessel. There are certain circles which look upon the Helicopter in the same way as the old sailor looked upon the introduction of steam, and, consequently, it is not receiving the encouragement the people working on it deserve, and which I am sure the Minister for War and Air would like to give it. It is of great importance for naval work. It will simplify the carrying of flying machines. It is important to this country from a commercial point of view as well as for the purposes of naval and military defence, and it is to the interest of the country that the Helicopter should be encouraged and that England should not be behind France or any other nation in this matter.
May I also raise another point, that is in regard to the question of kite balloons, for which there is an item here? I noticed in the "Times," under the title of "Naval News," an item to the effect that sloops
proceeding to the China station were having their kite balloon winches removed and the old appliances replaced. That appears to me to evidence a very shortsighted policy. Every ship sent to China should be equipped with the latest antisubmarine devices. and certainly with the kite balloon.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Whitley): That is clearly an Admiralty matter.

Lieut.-Commander- KENWORTHY: We are being asked to vote money for kite balloons and winches, and I would like to be assured that the kite balloon, with all its possibilities, is not to be treated as the Cinderella of the Air Service, but is to be fostered, although the immediate need for it may have disappeared.

Mr. HOGGE: There is one line in this Vote which requires some explanation. It is item "L"—a payment of over £16,000,000 for aircraft supplies delivered under war contracts. A great deal of criticism has been uttered from time to time with regard to the nature of the contracts made by the Government, and it has been said that owing to the slipshod fashion in which these contracts have been made, and owing also to the absence of a. break clause, the Government has been saddled with expenditure which otherwise might have been avoided. This —16,000,000, must obviously represent a great variety of material, and in view of the fact that the Air Service is subject to very quick and sometimes violent changes. we would rather like to know how much of this large sum really represents anything substantial, and whether any real use can be made of what has been supplied under these contracts, or whether it represents so much mere scrap.
Then with regard to the question of awards for inventors, I suppose nearly all of us during the War, and certainly since it closed, have received from time to time all kinds of claims—some quite sound and others very preposterous, with regard to, inventions submitted by the various Departments during the War. If I remember rightly there was a separate Department which dealt with the whole subject of inventions, located at Victory House, Trafalgar Square. But I believe the Government have since abandoned that as a separate Department. I would like to know whether this £25,000 represents money awards to inventors, who actually contributed something during the War, or
whether there is going to be maintained inside the Air Service, as inside the Admiralty, some kind of provision whereby inventors will have their ideas considered, and, if necessary, tested. The great difficulty in regard to inventions is, of course, one of expense in getting them tried, and if that is going to be provided for, the sum of £25,000 is a comparatively small expenditure. One would, therefore, like to know what is to be the policy of the Air Service in regard to this matter, and are we going to maintain an inventions Department inside the Air Ministry?

Captain REDMOND: The absence from the Government Front Bench of the Secretary for War and of other Ministers connected with the Air Service is only an indication of the futility of the Government policy with regard to the Air Ministry. It is true we have with us the Chief Secretary for Ireland and the Minister for Education, who have listened, I am sure, most interestedly to the criticisms directed against the Government policy towards the Air Ministry. But this is only another example of the scant courtesy which the present Government pay to the House of Commons and to the country generally. I wish to address a few observations in regard to the Votes for the Air Ministry which we, paltry individual Members of this house are asked by the Government to pass. Of course, I do not expect a reply from the Chief Secretary for Ireland, or from the Minister for Education, or from one of the Government Whips. What have they to do with the matter? But it is only fair to the House that when a matter is being discussed the Minister directly concerned, or his Parliamentary Secretary, should attend to hear what is said. Apart altogether from that, I would like to direct the attention of the House to the fact that we have not present the Minister directly concerned —

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Fisher): My right hon. Friend the Secretary for War has been unavoidably called away, and regrets very much that he is unable to be present. He has asked me to deal with the discussion, and I will do my best to answer the points raised.

Captain REDMOND: I quite appreciate the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, and of course accept the explanation of the absence of the Secretary for War. (At this point Mr. Churchill entered the House) I am glad to see the Air Minister is now in his place, and
6.0 P.M.
I want to ask him one or two questions with regard to the Vote before the House. I understand there were six great airships in process of completion only a few months ago. I believe they were very nearly completed, but they have now been scrapped. I want to know if it is a case that, the sum of £144,000 which is now being asked for, represents nothing more than one airship. What has been done with the material purchased for the other airships? What about the time and money expended on them? Is it altogether wasted, now that they have been dropped Then I have a word to say with regard to the location of hangars. I know that outside the City of Dublin, the Air Minister or War Minister erected a large aerodrome at Tallaght. Has he now abandoned it? They have spent a considerable sum of money and not all British money because it was just as much Irish money, and that is why I am interested in it. They have spent that money in the erection of this large aerodrome and have since abandoned it. Has not the same thing occurred in Scotland? Did not the Air Ministry erect a great aerodrome at Rosyth or in that vicinity, and have they not since abandoned it? They have shown that they are engaged upon one policy to-day and another policy to-morrow. Throughout their existence they have proved their ineptitude for the office they occupy. That being so, the House of Commons will be doing wrong to pass a Vote of this magnitude without discussing what has taken place in regard to the erection and demolition of various great aerodromes throughout the country. We have in existence a certain number of aerodromes in Ireland. I see it is proposed to spend £64,500 on hangars. I do not know how many hangars we have in Ireland; perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be able to inform rue upon that matter. I do know, however, that they have set up aerodromes at great public expense and at a waste of time and money, and no sooner have the aerodromes been erected than they have been demolished. Before this Vote is passed the House is entitled to an explanation of the money that has been expended upon these fruitless experiments, as they have proved to be, in Ireland and elsewhere.

Mr. E. KELLY: In looking over this Vote I was first disposed to think that the right hon. Gentleman was asking for a very moderate sum under Sub-head A— "Aeroplanes, Seaplanes, Engines and
Spares," amounting to £1,413,000, but on looking further down the Vote I notice that a very large sum appears under Sub-head L in respect of aircraft supplies delivered under war contracts. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman could tell us if Sub-head L is merely Sub-head A under another form. If item L merely refers to spare parts which are assembled by the mechanicians under the supervision of his own officers, for all practical purposes that item of £16,100,000 forms part of Sub-head A. It might also assist the House if the right hon. Gentleman could say whether, in regard to the purchase of seaplanes, there is an understanding between his Department and the Admiralty, and, if there is such an understanding, whether there are any credits due to the Air Ministry in respect of purchases by the Admiralty, or, conversely, if there are any debits from the Air Ministry to the Admiralty? The right hon. Gentleman occupies a unique position with regard to this question, because he has-filled, with great distinction, the highest posts in the Admiralty, the War Office, and Air Ministry, therefore the subject of the relations between the Air Ministry and the Admiralty with regard to the supply and use of seaplanes is one upon which he will always be ready to inform the House in the fullest possible manner. It is a subject which the House regards with peculiar concern and, perhaps, with a certain amount of suspicion. The House would be more ready to pass this Estimate if it were assured that there was no possibility of the Admiralty and Air Ministry working on diverging lines with regard to the development of seaplanes, because if they were to pursue such a policy to its ultimate conclusion it could only result in the gravest financial loss to the taxpayer. We have only the right hon. Gentleman to look to as the pivotal man between the two Departments concerned.
With regard to Sub-head J—Petrol and Oil, £1,522,100—perhaps the right hon. Gentleman could inform us if there is any prospect of this Vote being smaller in the coming year. The elements which lead me to expect such a result are—first, the Bill dealing with the agreement with the Anglo - Persian Oil Company, and, secondly, the prospect of the country where these wells are situated and adjoining the great pipe - line to the coast being more peaceful. We are led to believe that it is more
peaceful to-day, and if there is any prospect of it remaining so for the next twelve months we shall expect this Vote for petrol and oil to be considerably less in the coming year. Taking the Vote as it is, the expenditure on petrol alone is one which this House ought to query and examine in the fullest possible manner. It would reassure us if the right hon. Gentleman could give an assurance that the sum would be smaller in the next year and in years to come. With regard to Sub-head K—Rewards to Inventors—it is a great disappointment to Members on all sides to find that the newly-created Air Ministry, with this great science of aviation in its infancy, and progressing every day by leaps and bounds, can only afford £23,000 for the encouragement of inventions. That sum might well be increased by thousands at the expense of some of the items in the other Votes. There is no sub-head which has so strong a claim for an increase. Perhaps it is not possible for the right hon. Gentleman at this stage to increase the amount, but I certainly object to this miserable pittance. One inventor, bringing to the right hon. Gentleman one valuable invention, might well expect the whole £25,000 to be paid to him. During the War and up to the present we have had a melancholy history of inventions being scrapped or turned down by the War Office and Admiralty. We are not in a position to say how far the alleged claims of these inventors were properly made. It has always been the weakness of Government Departments that they are not prone to take up and utilise the ideas of the various inventors which are submitted to them. Has the right hon. Gentleman any machinery by which he encourages new ideas among his staff being brought to the notice of the Minister or head of the Department? The right hon. Gentleman is aware that there is a suggestion-box in every large manufacturing firm, and some of the greatest improvements in industrial machinery to-day have come out of the suggestion-box It would probably prove of great assistance in the development of military aviation if the right hon. Gentleman would consider the advisability of making some such provision as that. The hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain W. Benn) has raised the question of providing the best possible optical instruments for pilots. Would not that come under the head of "Rewards to Inventors"? These optical instruments are
changing from day to day. It is the least our pilots may expect when they are being sent into the air at great risk to their own lives, as the experience of every day only too unhappily reminds us, that the Ministry should provide them with the best possible optical instruments. It should set aside an adequate sum for the encouragement of inventors in effecting improvements in these optical instruments on which the lives of these pilots very often depend. These points are of considerable importance, and, in regard to them, the right hon. Gentleman should give us an explanation. We feel deeply indebted to him for the fulness with which he has explained the various points we have already raised.

Mr. CHURCHILL: A Minister has to be very careful not to offend the House by apparent abruptness, and, on the other hand, not to delay the progress of business by his own explanations. I will try shortly to answer some of the more substantial points which have been referred to by the various hon. Members who have spoken. As to the £25,000 for inventions, that admittedly is a small sum, but, in the first place, the Inventions and Research Department has only really begun to develop its station during the last few months. It is probable that more expense will be incurred on that account in later years. Also there are several important claims for inventions made during the War which are still sub judice and which are likely to mature, not in the current year but in the currency of the next financial year. I made a mistake a few minutes ago in saying that the Appropriations-in-Aid on Vote 1 of £450,000 was in respect of the airship. Of course, it had nothing to do with that at all in the item" Appropriations-in-Aid, £545,000" on this Vote is contained money received on account of the airship that has been sold. We are endeavouring to dispose of all the airships, with the exception of three, which are reserved for certain purposes. We hope to sell them to a company which will take them over under certain conditions. The Government will participate in any advantages which are gained from their use. I may have some more detailed statement to make on that subject when Parliament reassembles.

Captain REDMOND: Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to say that the Government will not lose anything in regard to the construction of those airships?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I have not the slightest doubt that the Government will lose enormous sums of money in regard to aeroplanes, airships, aerodromes, and all the gigantic business of air warfare, which was proceeding with ever increasing speed and ever intensifying volume when tile Armistice occurred. The great effort of the Air Force was to be made in the currency of the present year, and enormous plans had been made. The £16,000,000 under L represents the liquidation, and in some cases the completion, of a great mass of technical equipment for the Air Force for which contracts had been placed at the time of the peace by the Ministry of Munitions. A large portion of the contract has been taken over by the Ministry of Munitions. We were in a very difficult position when peace came to know what to do. The air industry was entirely new, and had been created entirely under the pressure of war. A very large number of working people had been taken from the neighbourhood of their homes to new centres to make all these different commodities, and new plant had been put down by entirely new firms, which sprang up simply for the purpose of war manufactures. Suddenly it had to be stopped, and we had to solve in each case the difficult problem whether it was more worth while to finish the article or to scrap the whole production at that moment. That was complicated also by the conditions of the labour market, which in December and January last were the cause of very grave anxiety. The whole of the munitions contracts were being shut down all over the place, and more than a million people were being turned off, and at the same time men were coming home front the front seeking employment, and we found it necessary, with various lines of production, to go easy in winding up these establishments. No doubt we incurred expense thereby, but looking at the situation as it was at that period I cannot think we were wrong in taking the labour element into consideration. However, when the War came to an end there were certain expenses arising out of the War, and this is part of that expense.
I was then asked about the Helicopter. There is no doubt at all that if civil aviation is to achieve really wide development., it must be through the agency of some quite different kind of aeroplane from that which is used at present. The great speed involved in landing aeroplanes at present, and the length of ground
which they require to pull up in will always invest with an element of peculiar danger that form of travelling. It is all very well for war or for adventure, but the moment you come to ordinary peace time commercial purposes safety is the first consideration. If this invention were successful, it would undoubtedly give us a machine which, if the engines stopped, would descend like a parachute, quietly and gently, and sit down on the ground without anyone being hurt. It would also give us a machine which would rise practically straight from anyone's back garden, and the extraordinary fact is revealed by investigation that it is by no means impossible, scientifically and theoretically, that the Helicopter machine would not only rise and descend perpendicularly, but when it progressed laterally it would be capable under certain conditions of developing very great speed. It is true that the inventor, Mr. Brennon, who has been studying this for a very long time—I started him on it when I was at the Ministry of Munitions—does not make the claim in regard to great lateral speed, but some scientists who have worked it out theoretically think it is by no means impossible. However, progress has been disappointingly slow, and indeed we have not yet succeeded in making a machine which will ascend into the air, and the whole field is extremely speculative; but it is certainly a matter of very great interest, which should be pursued with the greatest energy by all who are interested in the future of civil aviation.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that this very important investigation is not only not being hampered, but is being pushed from headquarters, because my information is that it is not?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I do not think that can be so. I think every person connected with the Air Service has been profoundly excited by the idea of such a flying machine, but their excitement would be tempered by a considerable measure of scepticism as to whether it would be likely to be achieved. Anyhow, I take great interest in the matter myself, and as long as I think there is any hope of a favourable result being arrived at along these lines I will see that the experiments are allowed to continue, and the inventor who is working on them has every possible facility. Of course, in all these matters one has to be careful not to spend money unless there is a good prospect of arriving at a result, but some latitude should be accorded in the matter. A substantial reduction in regard to petrol and oil may be expected in next year's Estimates. That is not due to the fact that we shall be getting supplies of oil for nothing from the Anglo-Persian field. We shall not. The cause of the reduction will be the large diminution in the number of persons flying for military purposes in the Royal Air Force.
Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

The House divided: Ayes, 230; Noes, 42.

WORKS, BUILDINGS AND LANDS.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Major BARNES: I think the Secretary of State for war would like to give us some explanation on this Vote of a matter
Which has attracted some attention outside. I refer to the sale by the Minitry of the Turnhouse farm. It will be remembered that a Noble Lord, who at one time occupied a very exalted position in the Government of this country, was surprised the other morning on opening his newspaper to find an advertisement of the pending sale of one of his best farms by
order of the Disposal Board of the Ministry of Munitions. He was naturally surprised that anybody, least of ail the Government, should propose to dispose of his property without his knowledge or acquiescence. Some correspondence passed in the Press in regard to. the matter. So far as I understand the case, possession was taken of this farm under the provisions of the Defence. of the Realm (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1916, for purposes connected with the War, that of erecting buildings to be used by the Air Force. To the best of my knowledge no objection was raised by the Noble Lord to this proceeding. Like everybody else, he was perfectly willing that his property should be taken and used if the War could be furthered by such procedure. I have no doubt an agreement was made and proper provision made for compensation. Buildings were erected and used, but the use for which they were required has now, happily, passed away. Under the Defence of the Realm (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1916, very considerable powers were given to the Government for dealing with property, and it is probable that what has been done by the Government has been done within the provisions of the Act, which gave them power to take possession of the land on payment of rent. That Act also gives power to erect buildings and to remove the buildings after proper compensation has been paid. There is also provision in the Act under which the property may not only be taken possession of, but may be actuaily acquired, either by agreement or compulsorily, for the purpose of Government Departments, and particularly for the purposes of the Ministry of Munitions, the Admiralty, the Army, and the Air Force.
The position that has apparently arisen is that the Disposal Board has been endeavouring to dispose of buildings that were erected on the land, but they came to the conclusion that, to remove the buildings and to sell them would not be such a profitable matter as to dispose of the whole thing as a going concern—that is, the buildings which belong to the Government, and the land which does not belong to the Government. They accordingly took steps by advertisement to offer the property for sale. I am not quite sure that that was within the intention of the Act when it was passed. Is this a case which ought fairly to he taken under the Defence of the Realm Act? Quite obviously what was
intended to be done was that land should only be taken where it was required for the purposes of the defence of the realm, and the possession could only be continued for that purpose. Where land was permanently acquired it could only be acquired because it was in the interests of the Department occupying the land or of the Services that it should be so acquired. The course taken in tins case does not arise out of any of those things. There is no contention that at the present time the land is required for the purpose of the defence of the realm or that the Air Ministry desires to remain in occupation for their own purposes. The Disposal Board has come to the conclusion that they can make more out of it by selling the whole than by simply selling the buildings. It is quite natural that they should want to get the most for the assets at their disposal, and they evidently think that they can get some thousands of pounds more by selling the land and the buildings than by dismantling the buildings and selling them. The question arises whether this sort of thing ought to be done under the Defence of the Realm Act. Clause 13, Sub-section (4), says:
Nothing in this Act shall authorise the compulsory acquisition of land with respect to, which an agreement has been made for the restoration thereof to the owner or the person previously in occupation thereof.
I assume that when this land was taken such an agreement was made to restore it to the owner or to the person in previous occupation. If that agreement was made it would appear that the action which the Government is now taking does not fall within the provisions of the Act. Clause 13, Sub-section (5), provides:
Nothing in this Act shall authorise the compulsory acquisition of land without the consent of the Commission where the purposes for which it is required are purposes other than those for which land can be acquired under the Defence Acts, 1842 to 1873, of the Military Lands Acts, 1892 to 1903.
If at the very outset when possession was taken it had been acquired outright this Section would have applied, because the land was being acquired for this purpose. It is being acquired now for an entirely different purpose. It is not being acquired for the Defence Acts or the Military Lands Acts, but it is being acquired for the purpose of reselling with other property at a profit. The action of the Government in this case raises a large issue. Here is a composite property; part belongs to them and part does not. They have taken pos-
session of the part which does not belong to them. They have added to it something which does. Now they say, "Because we can get more for our part by selling the whole we are going to sell the whole." There is no question here of the defence of the realm or of military purposes. This taking possession of other people's property and adding to it Government. property in the shape of some expenditure or other is a policy which is being largely pursued by the Government. They have just taken possession of the railways, and are going to spend a great deal of public money on them. They were going to take possession of a great many electrical undertakings and spend public money on them. This principle which is being adopted in the ease of the land may have far-reaching effects. The whole matter is one on which the right hon. Gentleman should give some explanation.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I have no wish to enter into any stormy controversy on this matter. There are many cases of the dispossession of the owners of land, and the conditions on which it should be restored and the compensation to be paid are subjects of prolonged negotiation at the present time. But I do not suppose there has been any case which has been more. thrashed out than this question of Lord Rosebery's farm. The most expert controversialists have been contributing almost daily letters setting forth the, two points of view, and anyone who has followed the correspondence will be inclined to think that the two cases have really been better stated than they can be here. As far as I am concerned, on behalf of the Government and the public Departments, I may say that they proceed within the existing limits of the law of the land. They are bound to do so. If they go beyond that they can be challenged in the Courts, and if they fall short of what their rights are they must be ready to show in the House of Commons why they have not fully asserted all their rights under the law. In any case, the matter is not now at a stage in which it can be benefited by a. discussion in this House, and I propose to allow matters to take their course. The tribunals which are set up, the methods of appeal, and the legal process will be sufficient to protect the community from abuse and individuals from injustice.

Mr. DEVLIN: The right hon. Gentleman has adopted an attitude which,
though somewhat new, has become characteristic—an attitude of complete contempt for all opinion except official opinion. I am not interested in this case, but I have taken advantage of the opportunity of reading the correspondence, and one would expect, when a matter of this sort is brought before the House of Commons, that some representative of the Ministry of Munitions or the Disposal Board would be here to take part in the discussion and offer some explanation in regard to what is not in controversy at all, but is a subject of bitter complaint by a very distinguished public man who was once Prime Minister of England and who, at all events, made in the War the sacrifice of his son, a brilliant Member of this House, Mr. Neil Primrose, who was honoured and even loved by every Member of every party in this House, and for a Minister of the Crown to treat the complaint of this eminent public man as the right hon. Gentleman has done, is only another proof of how the Minister's mind is poisoned by the information supplied to him from the official sources. No doubt it is perfectly true that this farm was taken during the time of the War by the Government for war purposes, but when it was no. longer needed for war purposes it should have been restored to it, owner. Things have come to a pretty pass In the House of Commons when I, an Irish Nationalist and an opponent of Lord Rosebery and his Irish policy, have to come here to defend him against the Bolsheviks who sit upon the benches opposite—because this is Bolshevism pure and simple. You seize the man's farm. I am not interested in Lord Rosebery or his farm, but I am interested in common right or common justice, whether it be for a lord or for a sweep, and I think that Lord Rosebery has very good reason to complain; and for the right hon. Gentleman to come here and tell the House, with a contemptuous gesture, that this was a matter for Lord Rosebery, the person whose farm was seized, and some jackanape of an official, and that he could not enter into controversies in a newspaper, is the most astounding doctrine I have ever heard. It has come to this, then, that so low is the moral of public life in this country that the most eminent Bolshevist, orators are to be found on the Ministerial Bench, and you can go and seize an ex-Prime Minister's farm with the same avidity as you suppress a newspaper in Ireland.

Mr. E. KELLY: The largest part of this Vote is the Vote in respect of the Grant for works and new buildings. This particular Sub-head for the combined Services under (c) has my heartiest sympathy, and my only regret is that in the Estimates with which I have hitherto come in contact it has not been possible to give a larger proportion of the total sum voted to new works. Under this Vote the right hon. Gentleman has adopted a very good scheme in regard to the manner in which -Sub-head (b) is set forth. That is to give a list of the various descriptions of work -and an estimate for the work to be done in the course of the current year. I think that that is an explanation which might very well apply to some of the larger Votes, because it comes as a shock to some Members of this House when there are vast sums of £5,000,000 and £10,000,000 expended and there is no such explanation as is offered under this Sub-head. In reference to No. 2 of Sub-head (b)— "Liquidation of War Contracts and Completion of necessary War Services, £4,586,000"—I assume that this was the inevitable loss on various materials and supplies which had been ordered in the course of the War, and. which it was necessary to dispose of at a figure much below what was paid for them. Under Sub-head (g)—"Rents of Land Hired or Requisitioned"—perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will tell us on what principle compensation has been paid for land which has been taken. Nothing has made the Air Service more unpopular than the manner in which land required has been taken both for aerodromes in the country and also as sites for Headquarter Staff in the towns. These sites were taken in the most oppressive and irritating manner possible. At this very moment one of the Government Departments has taken to the House of Lords a case in which the judges of the Chancery Division and the Court of Appeal laid down the principle that when a public Department takes land for its own use it must pay for it. Has the compensation for land which has been acquired in the past been held up pending a decision of this case, or if when compensation is given to people from whom land is taken do you proceed according to the principles of the Act passed only a few years ago, taking all the circumstances into consideration, as this Act was intended to guide public Departments
in regard to the manner in which compensation should be assessed and when it should be paid?
7.0 P.M.
I am driven to make these observations with regard to the acquisition of land because when land was taken in. Ireland, at any rate, it was quite impossible to get compensation out of the War Office, the Air Ministry, or any other public Department. I quite recognise the right hon. Gentleman may well plead that these were the sins of the Ministry of Munitions, but it is part of the penance of a Minister to inherit the sins of his predecessor, just as it is his privilege to shuffle off his own sins on to the head of a successor, and many hon. Members would like the right hon. Gentleman to give some explanation as to the sort of policy which will regulate the operations of his Department in future. This Grant in respect of land is particularly important, because on this Vote we are dealing with the policy which will regulate future purchases of land by this Department. That question of policy, however, can be more appropriately raised on the next Vote. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to explain one point, the importance of which will grow in the future. Sub-head H refers to the incidental expenses of the Air Ministry estates. I do not like that word "estates," because it seems to indicate that the Ministry is likely to have a large estate in the future. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to assure us that the estates referred to are only those portions of land adjoining existing aerodromes and hangars which have been acquired. Lastly, as in many instances the lands which have been acquired are the most valuable lands in the country, I would like the right hon. Gentleman to tell us how they are used and if they produce any credits for the Department. In Ireland some very fine land in and around Dublin belongs to the Air Ministry, and a very valuable crop of meadow has been taken off it. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to tell me if these lands are let or if they are used directly by the Air Ministry, and if any credits come to the Department from the use of them.

Mr. HOGGE: I am sorry that my right hon. Friend has not been able to give a decision about the case of Lord Rosebery's farm, because a great deal of public land has also been used for war purposes, and it raises the important point whether land
which has been lent for emergency purposes is to remain the property of the people who have lent it. I do not wish, however, to raise that point so much as to examine this Estimate again a little meticulously. No greater public service can be performed at the moment than the meticulous examination of these Estimates. Frequently, the House and the Government are committed to some large policy by the want of a careful examination of particular Estimates. There is a sum of £20,000 to be taken in the forthcoming year for the creation of a boys' training establishment; indeed, there is over £1,000,000 to be devoted, I suppose, to the completion of this particular establishment. I presume it means the beginning of a policy by which the Air Service is going to train up boys for the Service, probably on the mechanical side. in connection with the production of aeroplanes in the workshops. If that be so, it is committing the Government to a particular policy at a time when we are told that the proper thing to do is to reduce all our military establishments. I do not mind spending the money if it be part of a preconceived scheme upon which the Government have decided. That would be only taking a long view of the necessities of the Service and getting ready to make the Service, like the Navy and the Army, self-contained, so that everybody who entered it would pass through the portals of this training establishment and eventually reach the position which their merit and record deserved. I do not think that the House ought to approve of the spending of £1,250,000 on the foundation of this establishment unless we really understand how far it is part and parcel of a clear and defined policy, and where, after all, it is going to lead us. I presume that this establishment is at Halton Park. If hon. Members will look at the Estimates, they will see that the camp has not been particularly sanitary, because some £40,000 has been required to put the site into a sanitary condition.
I want to ask something about paragraph (b). We sometimes find embedded in these Estimates a rather distinct Empire fact. The phrase used in paragraph (b) is "accommodation at stations on aerial route between Egypt and India, £50,000." What is that aerial route? is it a route over British territory, or territory over which we have some protection? For what is it designed? Is it an Imperial venture,
or has it anything to do with the situation of Egypt and India from the point of view of possible disturbances in either of those countries or in both at the same time? I suppose that the route must have been mapped out. Is it part and parcel of another route? One observes in the newspapers the kinds of routes that are taken by airmen on these wonderful flights. The last flight from Great Britain to Australia covered a great deal of British territory. We get this kind of thing in an Estimate, and then we find that we are committed to further expenditure in later years in developing the complete route of which this may be more or less a part. I should like to know for what my right hon. Friend wants this £50,000 on this particular route.
I am sorry that more hon. Members are not examining these Estimates in view of the demand of people outside that we should cut our coat according to our cloth. Members are lacking in their duty if they do not attend to their work of examining these Estimates and finding out upon what the money is being spent. It is one of the highest public duties that any hon. Member can perform, and I am sorry that it is being left, as so many things which are vital to the prosperity of this Empire are left, to some of the Nationalist members from Ireland, whose party has been killed by the policy of the head of this Government. I notice that among the Appropriations-in-Aid in this particular Vote there is a repayment of £250,000 from an Allied Government. This is the first Estimate which I have seen in which an Appropriation-in-Aid has been received from an Allied Government. I want to know how far we are going to be repaid the money which we have advanced from time to time. Usually the British Government have to find the money in the first instance, and hope to make some arrangement with the other countries for the subsequent payment of that money. Here is a repayment of £250,000. I should like to know from what Allied Government it comes, or if it comes from one or from more than one, and for what it is repaid. I do not think that my right hon. Friend will feel that the three questions which I have asked are anything but apposite to this Vote, and I hope that he will be able to give us some information on them before we proceed to give him the Vote.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The hon. Member spoke first of the aerial route from Cairo to India. This £50,000, which is taken in the Vote this year, is only the beginning
of the preparation for the aerodromes and accommodation which will be required at Cairo, at Bagdad, and at Karachi, the three main points on the route from Cairo to India. This is the most important section of the route from London: to Australia, and it will come into existence as a going concern long before the other parts of the route are perfected. In the first place, it is in clear fine weather, where there are no clouds or disturbances such as affect flying enterprises in these islands, you are able to fly all the year round along that route, and long journeys will be or ought to be made with great certainty and safety there. In the second place, Cairo, Karachi, and Baghad are all places where we have our garrisons of Air Force in any case for military purposes, because we expect to hold this Middle East theatre very largely through the instrumentality of the air. They will be a substitute for large bodies of troops, and will supplement the troops which are holding these regions. Therefore, there will be three great air stations at these three centres. There will be, probably, eight or nine squadrons distributed among them. They have to be there in any case as part of our general strategic arrangement. It will be very convenient to let mail flying, passenger flying, and civil flying take place over this route because we shall have to keep the stations there anyhow. It will mean that you will not have to saddle the mail contract with the burden of all the aerodromes and hangars and the regular plant, because those will be there for military purposes. Of all the places where you can bring civil aviation into effective commercial use this section between Cairo and India is the best. It has also the effect of buckling the Empire together in a very remarkable manner, because by the saving of time it ought to be possible to fly in two days, or in three days at the outside, from Cairo to Karachi, and that saves a large part of the eleven or twelve days which would be spent at sea. It is, therefore, a very remarkable section in our aerial policy, and it brings Australia that much nearer. It is the pick of all the civil and commercial aviation routes which exist. On every ground, military as well as commercial and civil, it is the best.
With regard to Halton Boys' Training College, I can report that the buildings and estate now belong to the State. They were taken over in the War, but were so
much knocked about, both the house and the estate generally, that it was a better investment for the Crown to purchase than to pay money to the owner. We made a good bargain in the interest of the State, and it is now one of the most valuable properties in the possession of the Air Force. We not only propose to put our staff into the house, but we propose to put in the grounds the principal training college for young air mechanics. It is all part of the full scheme which was embodied in the Trenchard Memorandum. Nearly all the mechanics in the Royal Air Force want to go, at any rate, the overwhelming majority wish to go, and we should not be able to put any aeroplanes into the air unless we set to work at Once with the training of new and trustworthy mechanics. That, of course, takes time. For many months we have had between 3,000 and 4,000 boys in training. It is an imposing sight to see those enormous long walls with their hundreds of lathes, at which the boys are being taught professions which will be of the very greatest utility to them, apart from the Air Force, in their after-life. When you have these boys being trained there it is essential that the conditions should be suitable and provide for their health. At present the buildings are falling to pieces. We are going to replace the huts by a regular system of brick buildings, making the place a great and permanent centre of Air Force training. The sanitary arrangements also are being considered. There will be a gymnasium and a recreation room, and, I think, a cinema. At any rate, there will be all the regular institutions of a small, modern, educational community. With regard to the Appropriations-in-Aid, the principal payment has been made by the United States. Hon. Members will perhaps remember that in the last year of the War we undertook to assemble for the United States an enormous number of aeroplanes that they were not able to assemble themselves. The aeroplanes were brought over to this country in parts, and we fitted them together. Aerodromes were fitted up at considerable expense for this particular work. They have been able to repay us the charge agreed upon, and we have not had to wait, as we have had to do in regard to repayments by all other countries.
Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

The House divided: Ayes, 224; Noes, 40.

Division No. 160.]
AYES.
[6.21 p.m.


Acland, Rt. Han. Francis Dyke
Briggs, Harold
Craig, Col. Sir James (Down, Mid.)


Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte
Brittain, Sir Harry E.
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry


Allen, Lt.-Col. William James
Brown, Captain D. C. (Hexham)
Dalziel, Sir Davison (Brixton)


Archdale, Edward M.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William J.
Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)


Astor, Viscountess
Burdon, Colonel Rowland
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.


Atkey, A. R.
Burn, T. H. (Belfast)
Davies, T. (Cirencester)


Baldwin, Stanley
Campion, Colonel W. R.
Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)


Balfour, Sir Robert (Partick)
Carew, Charles R. S. (Tiverton)
Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)


Banbury, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick
Carr, W. T.
Dawes, J. A.


Barnett, Major R. W.
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.
Denison-Pender, John C.


Barnston, Major H.
Casey, T. W.
Dennis, J. W.


Barrand, A. R.
Cautley, Henry Strother
Denniss, E. R. Bartley (Oldham)


Barton, Sir William (Oldham)
Cayzer, Major H. R.
Dixon, Captain H.


Beckett, Hon. Gervasa
Cecil, Rt. Hon. E. (Aston Manor)
Dockrell, Sir M.


Benn, Com. Ian Hamilton (Greenwich)
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Oxford Univ.)
Duncannon, Viscount


Benn, Captain W. (Leith)
Chamberlain, N. (Blrm., Ladywood)
Du Pre, Colonel W. B.


Bennett, T. J.
Cheyne, Sir William Watson
Edge, Captain William


Bentinck, Lt.-Col. Lord H. Cavendish-
Clay, Captain H. H. Spender
Edwards, J. H. (Glam., Neath)


Betterton, H. B.
Clough, R.
Eyres-Monsell, Commander B. M.


Billing, Noel Pemberton
Coates, Major Sir Edward F.
Falle, Sir Bertram Godfray


Blake, Sir Francis Douglas
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Fell, Sir Arthur


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. C. W.
Cockerill, Brig.-Gen. G. K.
Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.


Bowyar, G. W. E.
Colvin, Brig. -General R. B.
FitzRoy, Captain Hon. Edward A.


Bramsdon, Sir T.
Courthope, Major George Loyd
Foreman, H.


Brassey, H. L. C.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish University)
Forestier-Walker, L.


Breese, Major C. E.
Craig, Captain Charles C. (Antrim)
Foxcroft, Captain C.


Ganzoni, Captain F. C.
Lowe, Sir F. W.
Roundell, Lt.-Colonel R. F,


Gardiner, J. (Perth and Kinross)
Lynn, R. J.
Rowiands, James


Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham
Macdonald, Rt. Hon. J. M. (Stirling)
Samuel, A. M. (Farnham, Surrey)


Gilbert, James Daniel
M'Guffin, Samuel
Samuel, S. (Wandsworth, Putney)


Gilmour, Lt.-Colonel John
M'Lean, Lt.-Col. C. W. W. (Brigg)
Sanders, Colonel Robert A.


Glanvilie, Harold James
McMicking, Major Gilbert
Sassoon, Sir Philip A. G. D.


Glyn, Major R.
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Scott, Leslle (Liverpool, Exchange)


Goff, Sir Park
Macquislen, F. A.
Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone)


Gould, J. C.
Mallalieu, Frederlck William
Seddon, James


Gretton, Colonel John
Malone, Major P. (Tottenham)
Shortt, Rt. Hon. E. (N'castle-on-T., W.)


Gritten, W. G. Howard
Manville, Edward
Simm, M. T.


Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (Leic., Leughboro')
Marks, Sir George Croydon
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. (Preston)


Hailwood, A.
Martin, A. E.
Stanton, Charles Butt


Hambro, Angus Valdemar
Matthews, David
Stephenson, Colonel H. K.


Hancock, John George
Middlebrook, Sir William
Strauss, Edward Anthony


Hanna, G. B.
Moles, Thomas
Sturrock, J. Long


Haslam, Lewis
Molson, Major John Elsdale
Sugden, Lieut. W. H.


Hayward, Major Evan
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Sutherland, Sir William


Hennessy, Major G.
Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C.
Sykes, Col. Sir A. J. (Knutsford)


Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.)
Morison, T. B, (Inverness)
Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempetead)


Hewart, Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon
Morrison, H. (Salisbury)
Taylor, J, (Dumbarton)


Hilder, Lt.-Colonel F.
Mount, William Arthur
Terrell, Capt. R. (Henley, Oxford)


Hills, Major J. W. (Durham)
Murray, Major C. D. (Edinburgh, S.)
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell- (M'yhl)


Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Murray, Hon. G. (St. Rollox)
Thorpe, Captain John Henry


Hood, Joseph
Murray, John (Leeds, W.)
Townley, Maximilian G.


Hope, Lt.-Col. Sir J. (Midlothian)
Murray, William (Dumfries)
Tryon, Major George Clement


Hope, John Deans (Berwick)
Mall, Major Joseph
Vickers. D.


Hopkinson, Austin (Mossley)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. (Exeter)
Waddington, R.


Howard, Major S. G.
Nicholson, R. (Doncaster)
Ward-Jackson, Major C. L.


Hughes, Spencer Leigh
Oman, C. W. C.
Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)


Hunter, Gen. Sir Archibald (Lancaster)
O'Neill, Captain Hon. Robert W. H.
Wardle, George J.


Hurd, P. A.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Waring, Major Walter


Inskip, T. W. H.
Palmer, Major G. M. (Jarrow)
Weston, Colonel John W.


Jackson, Lleut.-Col. Hon. F. S. (York)
Parry, Lt. -Colonel Thomas Henry
Whitla, Sir William


Joilett, William Morgan
Pearce, Sir William
Wigan, Brig. -Gen. John Tyson


Jesson, C.
Perkins, Walter Frank
Williams, Lt.-Com. C. (Tavistock)


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Phllipps, Sir O. C. (Chester)
Wills, Lt.-Col. Sir Gilbert Alan H.


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Pinkham, Lt.-Colonel Charles
Wilson, Capt. A. Stanley (Hold'ness)


Jones, J, Towyn (Carmarthen)
Pownall, Lt.-Col. Assheton
Wilson, Colonel Leslie (Reading)


Kerr-Smiley, Major P.
Pratt, John William
Wilson, Col. M. (Richmond, Yorks.)


Kidd, James
Prescott, Major W. H.
Wood, Major Hon. E. (Ripon)


King, Commander Douglas
Purchase, H. G.
Wood, Sir J. (Stalybridge and Hyde)


Klnloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Rae, H. Norman
Wood, Major S. Hill- (High Peak)


Law, A. J. (Rochdale)
Raeburn, Sir William
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Glasgow)
Raw, Lt.-Colonel Dr. N.
Yate, Col. Charles Edward


Lewis, T. A. (Pontypridd, Glam.)
Reid, D. D.
Yeo, Sir Alfred William


Lindsay, William Arthur
Rendall, Athelstan
Young, Lt.-Com. E. H. (Norwich)


Lister, Sir R. Ashton
Richardson, Sir Albion (Peckham)
Young, William (Perth and Kinross)


Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Hunt'don)
Roberts, Sir S. (Sheffield, Ecolesall)



Long, Rt. Hon. Walter
Robinson S. (Brecon and Radnor)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.— Lord E.


Lonsdale, James R.
Rodger, A. K.
Talbot and Captain F. Guest


Lorden, John William
Rogers, Sir Hallewell



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. William
Harbison, T. J. S.
Rose, Frank H.


Barnes, Major H. (Newcastle, E.)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Widnes)
Royce, William Stapleton


Bell, James (Ormsklrk)
Hirst, G. H.
Short, A. (Wednesbury)


Briant, F.
Hogge, J. M.
Sitch, C. H.


Bromfield, W.
Kelly, Edward J. (Donegal, E.)
Swan, J, E. C.


Cairns, John
Kenworthy, Lieut-Commander
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


cape, Tom
Kenyon, Barnet
Thorns, W. (Plalstow)


Carter, W. (Mansfield)
Lawson, John
Tootill, Robert


Davies, Alfred (Clitheroe)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Walsh, S. (Ince, Lancs.)


Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)
MacVeash. Jeremiah
Waterson, A. E.


Edwards, C. (Bedwellty)
Murray, Dr. D. (Western Isles)
Wignall, James


Griffiths, T. (Pontypool)
Newbould, A. E.
Young, Robert (Newton, Lanes.)


Guest, J. (Hemsworth, York)
Onions, Alfred



Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES—


Hallas, E.
Richardson, R. (Houghton)
Mr. Devlin and Captain Redmond.


Fourth Resolution read a second time.

Division No. 161.]
AYES.
[7.23 p.m.


Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte
FitzRoy, Captain Hon. Edward A.
Murray, Hon. G. (St. Rollox)


Allen, Lt.-Col. William James
Foreman, H.
Murray, William (Dumfries)


Archdale, Edward M.
Foxcroft, Captain C.
Neal, Arthur


Astor, Viscountess
Fraser, Major Sir Keith
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. (Exeter)


Atkey, A. R.
Ganzoni, Captain F. C.
Oman, C. W. C.


Baird, John Lawrence
Gardiner, J. (Perth and Kinross)
O'Neill, Captain Hon. Robert W. H.


Baldwin, Stanley
Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Balfour, sir Robert (Partick)
Gilbert, James Daniel
Palmer, Major G. M. (Jarrow)


Banbury, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick
Gilmour, Lieut.-Colonel John
Palmer, Brig. -Gen. G. (Westbury)


Barnett, Major R. W.
Goff, Sir Park
Parry, Lt.-Colonel Thomas Henry


Barnston, Major H.
Gould, J. C.
Pearce, Sir William


Barrand, A. R.
Gretton, Colonel John
Perkins, Walter Frank


Barton, Sir William (Oldham)
Gritten, W. G. Howard
Philipps, Sir O. C. (Chester)


Beckett, Hon. Gervase
Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (Leic., Loughboro')
Pinkham, Lt -Colonel Charles


Bell, Lt.-Col. W. C. H. (Devizes)
Kailwood, A.
Pollock, Sir Ernest M.


Bennett, T. J.
Hambro, Angus Valdemar
Pratt, John William


Bigland, Alfred
Hancock, John George
Prescott, Major W. H,


Bird, Alfred
Hanna, G. B,
Purchase, H. G.


Blades, Sir George R.
Haslam, Lewis
Rae, H. Norman


Blake, Sir Francis Douglas
Hennessy, Major G.
Raeburn, Sir William


Bowyer, G. W. E.
Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.)
Raner, A. Baldwin


Brassey, H. L. C.
Herbert, Col. Hon. A. (Yeovil)
Raw, Lieut.-Colonel Dr. N.


Breese, Major Charles
Hewart, Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon
Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel


Bridgeman, William Clive
Milder, Lt.-Colonel F.
Rees, Sir J. D.


Briggs, Harold
Hills, Major J. W. (Durham)
Reid, D. D.


Brittain, Sir Harry E.
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Robinson, S. (Brecon and Radnor)


Brown, Captain D. C. (Hexham)
Hood, Joseph
Rodger, A. K.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William J.
Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)
Rogers, Sir Hallowell


Burden, Colonel Rowland
Hope, Lieut-Col. Sir J. (Midlothlan)
Roundell, Lt.-Colonel R. F.


Butcher, Sir J. G.
Hope, John Deans (Berwick)
Rowlands, James


Campion, Colonel W. R.
Hopkinson, Austin (Mossley)
Samuel, A. M. (Farnham, Surrey)


Carew, Charles R. S. (Tiverton)
Howard, Major S. G.
Samuel, S. (Wandsworth, Putney)


Carr, W. T.
Hughes, Spencer Leigh
Sanders, Colonel Robert A.


Casey, T. W.
Hurd, P. A.
Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)


Cautley, Henry Strother
Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Hon. F. S. (York)
Seager, Sir William


Cayzer, Major H. R.
Jephcott, A. R.
Seddon, James


Cecil, Rt. Hon. E. (Aston Manor)
Jellett, William Morgan
Shortt, Rt. Hon. E. (N'castle-on-T., W.)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Oxford Univ.)
Jesson, C.
Simm. M. T.


Chadwick, R. Burton
Johnson, L. S.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. (Preston)


Chamberlain, N. (Birm., ladywood)
Jones, Sir Evan (Pembroke)
Stanton, Charles Butt


Cheyne, Sir William Watson
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Stephenson, Colonel H. K.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Strauss, Edward Anthony


Clay, Captain H. H. Spender
Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen)
Sturrock, J. Leng-


Clough, R.
Kerr-Smiley, Major P.
Sugden, Lieut. W. H.


Coates, Major Sir Edward F.
Kidd, James
Sutherland, Sir William


Cobb, Sir Cyril
King, Commander Douglas
Sykes, Col. Sir A. J. (Knutsford)


Cockerill, Brig.-General G. K.
Knights, Captain H.
Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempstead)


Calvin, Brig. -General R. B.
Law, A. J. (Rochdaie)
Taylor, J. (Dumbarton)


Coote, Colin R. (Isle of Ely)
Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Glasgow)
Terrell, Capt. R. (Henley, Oxford)


Cope, Major W. (Glamorgan)
Lewis, T. A. (Pontypridd, Glam.)
Townley, Maximilian G.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish University)
Lister, Sir R. Ashton
Tlyon, Major George Clement


Cowan, Sir H. (Aberdeen and Kinc.)
Long, Rt. Hon. Walter
Vickers, D.


Cozens-Hardy, Hon. W. H.
Lonsdale, James R.
Waddington, R.


Craig, Captain Charles C. (Antrim)
Lorden, John William
Wallace, J.


Craig, Col. Sir James (Down, Mid.)
Lynn, R. J.
Ward-Jackson, Major C. L.


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
M'Guffln, Samuel
Wardle, George J.


Croft, Brig.-General Henry Page
M'Lean, Lt.-Col. C. W. W (Brigg)
Waring, Major Walter


Dalziel, Sir Davison (Brixton)
McMicking, Major Gilbert
Weston, Colonel John W.


Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)
Macqulsten, F. A.
Whitla, Sir William


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Maltland, Sir A. D. Steel-
Wlgan, Brlg.-Gen. John Tyson


Davies, T. (Cirencester)
Mallalleu, Frederick William
Willey, Lt.-Col. F. V.


Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)
Malone, Major P. (Tottenham)
Williams, Lt.-Com. C. (Tavlstock)


Dawes, J. A.
Manville, Edward
Wills, Lt.-Col. Sir Gilbert Alan H.


Denlson-Pender, John C.
Marks, Sir George Croydon
Wilson, Capt. A. Stanley (Hold'ness)


Dennis, J. W.
Martin, A. E.
Wilson-Fox, Henry


Denniss, E. R. Bartley (Oldham)
Middlebrook, Sir William
Wood, Sir J. (Stalyhridge and Hyde)


Dixon, Captain H.
Moles, Thomas
Wood, Major S. Hill- (High Peak)


Dockrell, Sir M.
Molson, Major John Elsdale
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Duncannon, Viscount
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Yate, Col. Charles Edward


Edge, Captain William
Moore-Brabazon, Lleut.-Col. J. T. C.
Yeo, Sir Alfred William


Edwards, J. H. (Glam., Neath)
Morlson, T. B. (Inverness)
Young, Lt.-Com. E. H. (Norwich)


Eyres-Monsell, Commander B. M.
Morrison-Bell. Major A. C.
Young, William (Perth and Kinross)


falcon. Captain M.
Mosley, Oswald



Falle, Sir Bertram Godfray
Mount, William Arthur
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Fell, Sir Arthur
Munro, Rt. Hon. Robert
Lord E. Talbot and Captain F. Guest.


Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Murray, Major C. D. (Edinburgh, S.)





NOES.


Aclard, Rt. Hon. Francis Dyke
Briant, F.
Cape, Tom


Adamson, Rt. Hon. William
Bromfield, W.
Carter, W. (Mansfield)


Bowerman, Right Hon. C. W.
Cairns, John
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.




Devlin, Joseph
Kenyon, Barnet
Swan, J. E. C.


Edwards, C. (Bedwellty)
Lawson. John
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Entwistle, Major C. F.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Thorne, W. (Plaistow)


Guest, J. (Hemsworth, York)
Onions, Alfred
Tootill, Robert


Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Walsh, S. (Ince, Lanes.)


Harbison, T. J. S.
Raftan, Peter Wilson
Waterson, A. E.


Hayward, Major Evan
Redmond, Captain William A.
Williams, J. (Gower, Glam.)


Henderson, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Widnes)
Richardson, R. (Houghton)
Wood, Major Mackenzie (Aberdeen, C.)


Hirst, G. H.
Royte, William Stapleton



Hogge, J. M.
Short, A. (Wednesbury)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Holmes, J. Stanley
Sitch, C. H.
Mr. MacVeagh and Mr. Edward Kelly,


Irving, Dan

AIR MINISTRY (EXPENSE).

Fifth Resolution read a second time.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Mr. E. KELLY: There are a number of questions of policy which occurred to us from time to time as we discussed the previous Votes, but, in accordance with your ruling, as they were then out of order, we have reserved them until the present Vote. I must say that if the Trenchard Memorandum contained half as much information as that which the right hon. Gentleman has given in the course of his speeches this afternoon it would be ten times a more valuable document than it is. There is one point on which I speak with a certain amount of diffidence as an ordinary layman, but anyone occupying a representative capacity cannot escape the demands of his conscience by silence. Firstly, I would point out that there is no naval flying base in Ireland, nor adequate schools there for the training of pilots. I notice in the Trenchard Memorandum, with some surprise, that credit is taken for the establishment of a cadet college in Lincolnshire, because we are told it is an ideal place, with perfect flying surroundings. I put it to the right hon. Gentleman that, in addition to having a cadet college where the flying conditions are perfect, he should also have a cadet college where the conditions arc different, so that the pilots may be trained to meet all sorts of conditions. The Service will suffer owing to these cadet schools being confined to England and the East Coast of Scotland, because the pilots will be turned out with an insufficient acquaintance with the atmospheric conditions in the other parts of these islands. We all know from the barometric chart that the atmospheric conditions vary from place to place, and even from time to time. The right hon. Gentleman pointed out that special attention is being given to the Cairo-Karachi-Bagdad portion of the air route to Australia, and he men-
tioned in justification for that that the weather there was always good. I hope, in addition, the Ministry will also recognise that they must also prepare for bad as well as good weather. I think, too, it would be well if the. responsible head of the Ministry gave more attention to the question of the establishment of an air base at Singapore, which would serve the double purpose of assisting the development of civil as well as military aviation. The right hon. Gentleman has been called on to devote more attention to civil aviation, and his answer to that has been that the money is not sufficient, and no doubt if it were he would feel in a position to do more in that direction.
Before the War all our eyes were turned to the North Sea, but we must look further afield in the future for possible enemies, and we must throw our outposts wider. The importance of the North Sea and the East Coast of Scotland and of England has become a thing of the past. Singapore is one of the most important strategical positions in the Eastern world at present. There is another part of the world whose strategic importance seems to have been neglected and that is Ireland. I do not say that because I am an Irishman and represent an Irish Constituency, but really it took the great War to make us realise the importance strategically of Ireland, and here we are at the end of it, and it amazes me that the strategic importance of Ireland has not yet been grasped. Ireland lies right across the greatest trade routes of the world between this country and North and South America. I am surprised and disappointed on looking over the Trenchard Report to find in the list of new works that the importance of Ireland in this respect is not at all recognised. There are two points in Ireland of supreme importance, North and South. They are the nearest points for attack or defence or assistance to any airships or aeroplanes making the great Atlantic crossing. They are the points moreover where the most contrary and least constant atmospheric
conditions prevail. For all these reasons we would expect that one of the first stations to be established by the Air Ministry would be a large aeroplane station on the North-West Coast of Ireland and another on the South-West. Instead of that being done, whatever air establishments are there are being gradually withdrawn. The establishment of such stations as I suggest would go far to meet something of the complaints made by those who complain that civil aviation is meeting with insufficient attention. As regards civil aviation generally, it appears to me there is a large field of research which no private commercial company can be expected to engage in and which nevertheless is a very proper function for the Government and very necessary for the head of a competent Air Service. I refer to the complete investigation along the trade routes which would also mean the battle routes, so far as the air is concerned. It is just as important for the Air Minister of the future to provide maps and charts of the air and descriptions of the atmospheric conditions as it was to provide maps of the various countries in the past. The provision of maps of the country and charts of the sea was made by the Army and Navy authorities respectively, and a company establishing a new line of steamships to any part of the world would be admirably provided with surveys and soundings by the Admiralty, which recognised that it was a duty they owed to the nation and to the British Mercantile Marine.
The right hon. Gentleman occupies this unique position: He is now at the head of what is going to become in the next few years the greatest Department in the State, and it is from his brains that the various ideas must come that will regulate the policy and the development of that Department. Moreover, he is the head of a Department which is travelling along an uncharted sea, and where it therefore follows that the personal views and imagination of the Minister will count for everything. Therefore, I appeal to him that one of the most important things for his Department to do to-day is to chart the air just as the land and the sea have already been charted. In comparing the Australian route with the American route, one is struck by the fact that it is only for comparatively short flights that the pilot on the Australian route will be away from land. I speak subject to correction,
but I think the longest non-stop flight across the seas is about 450 miles on that route. Unfortunately, no such conditions can be created with regard to Atlantic flights. One would think that the air route to Australia was specially provided by Providence with a number of suitable landing-places which the aviator can visit without being taken very much out of the direct line between London and the various European capitals and the North-East Coast of Australia. Therefore, we find quite naturally that the development of that air route is proceeding apace, and that, although Australia cannot compare in numbers, in wealth', or in industrial importance with the United States, arrangements are much further forward for the purpose of linking it up by aeroplane with the Mother Country than are the arrangements for linking up the Continent of America with these Islands. But it is certain that in the very near future we must do our part towards providing the means which will make it possible to establish a successful aeroplane service between this country and America, and one of the most useful of them will be the systematic and thorough study of the climatic conditions around the whole of the Atlantic Ocean, starting from the Western Coast of Ireland.
Question put, and agreed to.
Remaining Resolutions agreed to.

Orders of the Day — WAYS AND MEANS [15TH DECEMBER.]

Resolution reported,
That, towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1920, the sum of £213,526,824 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom.

Resolution agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in upon the said Resolution by the Chairman of Ways and Means, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Baldwin.

CONSOLIDATION FUND (APPROPRIATION BILL)—"to apply a sum out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the year ending on thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and twenty, and to appropriate the Supplies granted in this
Session of Parliament," presented accordingly; read the first time; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 244.]

Orders of the Day — ANGLO-PERSIAN OIL COMPANY.

Order for Third Reading of the AngloPersian Oil Company (Acquisition of Capital) Amendment Bill read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."

8.0 P.M.

Mr. KIDD: The House will realise the significance of this Bill so far as the Scottish oil industry is concerned. On the Second Reading of this Bill the discussion centred around the grave discontent in the Scottish oilfields arising from the fact that the shale-miners have been refused the demands they have put forward. Towards the close of that Debate the Financial Secretary was good enough to indicate that he would bring under the notice of the directors of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, now to all intents and purposes the proprietors of the Scottish industry, the demands of the men, but he took the precaution of pointing out that the question after all was simply a business question, that if the industry was found to be able to sustain the demands of the men then in all likelihood the demands would be granted, but that if, on the other hand, the industry was unequal to supporting those demands, then the probability would be that they could not be granted. That proposition seems a very simple one and one which every Member will endorse, and the proposition is also likely to be endorsed by every shale-miner, but the position is not quite so simple as the hon. Member would make it out to be. We all agree that the industry must be self-sustaining, but that proposition only holds good where the Government have not interfered with the industry. If the Government have interfered, then of course the position is entirely altered, and the validity of the proposition mentioned is destroyed. That is exactly what has happened here. The Government has intervened in the coal trade to the extent of giving the coal-miners a seven hours' day, as desired by the Sankey Commission. Up to that time the coal-miners and the shale-miners had been on equal terms with regard to hours of labour, and the shale-miners' position now is this: If by Parliamentary interference you can in an arbitrary way fix
hours for the coal-miners, then you must exercise the same interference in the same way towards the shale-miners.
This position surely is justified by the consideration that in giving to the coal-miners the seven hours' day, the Government must have been guided by one or other of two views. They must either have given the concession from a certain feeling of timidity, a view which we should at once criticse, or they must have given the concession from the standpoint that now Parliament is interfering in the hours of labour, the man who works underground is entitled to a preference as compared with the man who works on the surface; and that, I submit, is the only reasonable view to take of the consideration weighing with the Government on the seven hours' question. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and the argument for the coal-miners is equally strong for the shale-miners. I recognise that the distinction between the coal industry and the shale industry is readily appreciated. The coal-miner is a monopolist, with the home market as a security, but the shale-miner may be regarded simply as the initial contributory in a scientific process, the products of which process have no home market for security but are in competition with similar products gathered from all over the world. The shale-miner takes the view that for the discontent arising in his industry at the present moment the Government is directly responsible, and it is only an extension of that responsibility to say that it rests with them to remove the discontent. The hon. Gentleman puts aside bounties as a suggestion which is not to be tolerated. We have given a bounty to the baker and the builder, and, indirectly, at the cost of the coal mines and the coal trade to manufacturing industries of the country, but when the shale-miner asks for a bounty he is turned aside. I am going to assume that, for the time being, the Financial Secretary is justified in the attitude he takes up, and I can assure him that his declaration that he will put the claims of the shale-miner carefully before the Anglo-Persian Oil Board will be very thankfully received. I am sorry the Leader of the Labour party is absent, otherwise in his presence I would have suggested a simple solution whereby peace could be maintained in the industry, without infringing the economic purism of the Financial Secretary The solution
could be discovered in much more closely identifying shale miners and shale workers in the industry in which they are engaged. We hear a good deal in these days of copartnership and co-operation in industry as a means of bringing about industrial peace. Those of us who have considered the matter recognise that any attempt to compel partnership in an arbitrary way might be very much more fatal to industry than anything that has occurred, and that the worker's position might be worse. But there is one very simple form of partnership to which the Labour Leader might listen, and a partnership which might be practicable in the oil industry with every hope of success. The shale field of Scotland is very small, and is in a compact area under the control of one gigantic company. The principal shareholder in that company is His Majesty's Government, The board is a board representative, therefore, not merely of the individual interests, but also of the national interests, while the company itself is a company with great finances, with the command of scientific and engineering knowledge, and, what perhaps is most important, it is a company whose ramifications are such that to a large extent it can control the markets. I am going to suggest to the Labour Leader that he might find it possible to advise the Shale Miners' Union and the Shale Workers' Union to acquire such a holding in the company that at least by negotiation they might secure some representation also on the board. In that case we would have the oil industry of Scotland conducted by a company the board of which was representative of the local interests, the workers' interests, the national interests, and the interests of the individual shareholders. Under that combination I think we might take it that peace would at once be restored to the shale field. Not only so, but we should have added dignity to the position of the shale worker, and I for one entertain the view that by adding to the dignity of labour you improve the chances of an ample reward from labour. I hope that from the OFFICIAL REPORT to-morrow the Labour Leader may be sufficiently impressed with my suggestion that he may submit it to the trade unions which I have mentioned, because in that way the prosperity of this industry in Scotland will not only be maintained but will be largely increased.

Sir J. D. REES: It is not clear to me that the hon. Gentleman has suggested
that the Anglo-Persian Oil Company are likely to treat shale miners unfairly. That suggestion has been made, and I do not think it should be allowed to pass unchallenged
Notice taken that forty Members were not present; House counted, and forty Members being found present—

Sir J. D. REES (resuming): I think the Anglo-Persian Oil Company can and will treat their employés with the utmost consideration, and is in the position, perhaps, to give them higher wages than they are getting at present. It is quite conceivable that but for this company stepping in they would be bereft of the employment they now have.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir J. HOPE: I hope the Financial Secretary to the Treasury will give us some assurance before we pass this Bill that he has the power, and also the will, to do something to maintain the shale industry in Scotland. It is a most important industry in the interests of the nation. He has said himself that it is desirable to get as much oil as we can, even if a small amount, inside the confines of the United Kingdom. This question has been already touched upon, and it has been pointed out that the shale industry in Scotland is under an economic difficulty. I submit it is an important industry to the country, and should be maintained. I do not suggest a subsidy to the industry, but I think when the Government have control of the company which is now in possession of the whole shale industry, they might at all events work the industry and keep the shale mines going. Even if there is very little profit, or perhaps no profit at all, it would be worth while to do so, in the interests of the nation, and also in the interests of a large number of men who are employed in the industry. They worked on at comparatively small wages during the War for the sake of the nation, and it is only justice that they should have time, anyhow, to conform to the new conditions, and I trust the Government will do nothing to throw out of employment a large and deserving body of men. It would be fatal to the whole interests of the nation, and I trust we shall get some assurance from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury tonight.

Mr. BILLING: I do not wish to do anything to delay the Government in proceeding with their business, but I do rise to
register a protest against the way the business is being rushed through. The majority of the House at the present time is of the opinion that we are still on the Army Estimates, and a most important measure of this description is being carried through, or was being carried through, in the presence of five Members of this House. I do appeal to the Government that before they proceed to utilise the machinery of the House in the way they have done, they will at least acquaint hon. Members with the business that is being transacted.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read the third time, and passed.

Orders of the Day — UNION OF BENEFICES BILL [Lords.]

Order for Second Reading read.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Major Baird): I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
This is a Bill which has already passed the House of Lords twice, and it is designed, not to effect any big change of plan, but merely to improve the methods for uniting different benefices in the same parish. At present great hardship is suffered because of the impossibility of doing this owing to the limitation imposed by the Pluralities Act, and the necessity of obtaining the assent of the patrons in writing. In consequence, great suffering is being endured by large numbers of the clergy, and this Bill is designed to remove it. In the ordinary course, this is a matter that would be dealt with by the new machinery that has been set up by the Enabling Bill, but as that would entail at least six or eight months' delay, I hope the House will consent to give this Bill a Second Reading and allow details to be considered at a subsequent stage. I do not think there is any controversy so far as the Church is concerned, and I hope the House will support this most necessary and desirable measure of reform.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House for To-morrow—[Major Baird].
The remaining Government Orders were read, and postponed.

Orders of the Day — IRELAND.

SUPPRESSION OF "FREEMAN'S JOURNAL."

Mr. T. P. O'CONNOR: I beg to move, "That this House do now adjourn."

The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Macpherson): Before the hon. Member begins, I should like to inform the House that this matter is now the subject of an arrangement which the Government has accepted. I only wish to state that it is the intention of the Government in this Debate to pay due regard to this, so that neither one side nor the other shall disclose beforehand anything with regard to the case that is to come before the Court.

Mr. O'CONNOR: I quite accept the suggestion made by the right hon. Gentleman, but the Motion I have to make refers to an incident, and to a discussion of a policy rather than of a particular act. In my observations I will keep as far away as I can from any consideration which arises in this particular case. It is the question of policy which I shall discuss on the Motion which stands in my name. It is only a strong sense of public duty that induces me to interrupt the business of the House with this Motion, but I have that duty laid upon me in this case, because in Ireland we are rapidly approaching an abyss and a disaster the consequences of which will not be confined to Ireland, but affect beyond the liberty and interests of the British Empire. I will go further and say it will affect, and may even blast, the great and noble hopes of a better world for the future on which the better minds of the world are fixed.
Let me deal as impartially as I can, on account of the statement just made by the Chief Secretary, with the incidents which have given rise to my Motion. A body of soldiers entered the office of the "Freeman's Journal" yesterday, and seized and took away a considerable portion of the plant. Anyone who has any idea of a newspaper and its production, or of any manufacturing office, will know that to take away the plant is practically to destroy the existence of the concern. The result is that the "Freeman's Journal" has not been issued to-day. It is not merely the destruction, for the time being, of a very valuable property, for which a considerable sum of money has been recently paid; it also strikes at one of the organs of public opinion which has been
silenced. The allegation, I understand, made by the Government is that the issue of yesterday contains seditious matter, and especially matter which interferes seriously with recruiting. I wish to say a word or two about the incidents which led to the event, because I think they must be remembered when one. is estimating the tone of the article in the "Freeman's Journal." There is each Christmas time in Ireland an exhibition mainly for the encouragement of Irish goods and Irish industries. This exhibition is continued at the expense of a number of patriotic men anxious for the development of Irish industries, and, like other expositions of that kind, it brings from all parts of Ireland, and even all parts of the world, people to Dublin who are interested in the realisation of the industrial resources of Ireland A body of soldiers entered the Mansion House in Dublin, which is the residence of the Chief Magistrate of the capital of Ireland, and prevented the holding of this exhibition. They occupied the premises for some time. I should say that anybody who has any desire for the welfare of Ireland would regard an exhibition of the kind I have described as one of the most necessary parts of good policy by a. Government at the present time. I would have also have thought that owing to the fact that it was being held in the dwelling place of the chief magistrate some regard would be had to the character of the gentleman who was chief magistrate for the time being. The present Lord Mayor of Dublin, although he is personally unknown to me, has the goodwill and respect of everybody in Dublin. Nobody can suppose that he has any sympathy with crime. Nobody in the country has more promptly and severely denounced it.
The excuse, I understand, for the interference with the private dwelling house of the Chief Magistrate of Dublin, is that this exposition has some relation, either public or private, with one of the organisations which the right hon. Gentleman, and the Irish Government, has proclaimed. I do not know whether that is so or not, whether any such connection exists or not, but I cannot see that an exhibition of Irish goods should be broken up because another organisation in some way or other is supposed to be associated in it. There cannot be anything seditious in an exhibition of Irish goods for Irish and other persons. About the time of the holding of that exposition there was a great sweep
of Sinn Feiners in Ireland. Many of them were brought over to this country. I will not stop for a moment to discuss that, but I believe they were behind barbed wires and were taken to Wormwood Scrubs. The hon. Member for South Down happened to come over in the same train. He has described the pain, humiliation, and indignation with which he saw all these men kept away from cornmunication with others, surrounded at every railway station by men wth fixed bayonets, and put into vans, like any common criminals, and taken through the streets of London to a London gaol. I must say that if any Continental admirer of free institutions and the liberty for which we have been fighting for five years were present, he would, I am afraid, find, little consolation in the performance.
The next incident which apparently accounts for the article was—and the right hon. Gentleman will confirm or contradict this—that in order to strengthen the operations against crime in Ireland a certain number of Civil servants were to be enrolled as special constables. That report, by the way, was given great prominence in the "Morning Post." During the War the raising of special constables from the Civil Service in Ireland was necessary, and was bound to be accompanied by acts of menace against the Civil servants, and to subject them to conditions which they had a perfect right to resent and to refuse. I do not know whether the Chief Secretary or the Attor-ney-General for Ireland mean to read these articles, but if it will suit the convenience of the Debate for me to read them I will do so.

Mr. MACPHERSON: Most certainly.

Mr. O'CONNOR: I think the objection of the right hon. Gentleman was not mainly to the leading article but to an accompanying article on the same page.

Mr. MACPHERSON: To both.

Mr. O'CONNOR: Very well, I will read the leading article. It is as follows:
"The Foreign Executive.
The miserable Irish Executive are reduced to the pass of attempting to conscript the Civil Service as a supplementary police force. They have at their disposal over sixty thousand troops, with all the equipment of modern war aeroplanes, tanks, machine-guns, and gas. They have, in addition, fourteen thousand men in the shape of a militarised police force. But. their seventy-five or eighty thousand men are not sufficient even for the ordinary work of keeping the peace. Burglars, footpads, high
waymen and garotters are enjoying a halcyon time. They conduct their enterprises without risk to themselves or consequences to themselves. Whatever opportunities of fair and market had been left by the Government to certain districts of Ireland the highwaymen are suspending by their operations and thus effectively supplementing the ukase.
In their pitiable plight the Executive have now conceived the idea of impressing the Irish Civil servant. As in the days of the war, heads of Departments have been invited to afford facilities to the recruiter, who is about to visit them. In similar circumstances in other countries, if similar circumstances were now any longer possible in any country inhabited by a European race, the Government would call upon the ordinary citizen for assistance, and it would be freely forthcoming.…Here the call would be like the summons of Glendower to the spirits of the vastv deep. and receive the same answer. As far as the support of the civilian population is concerned the Government exists in racuo. It is steadily dying for want of oxygen; but as it dies it becomes, like the wasp, more poisonously active. The difficulties are of its own creation. The olive have been diverted from their ordinary duties to support an unsupportable political r´gime. Hence their impotence to discharge the functions of a police force; and hence the real criminal thrives as quickly as the political criminal is manufactured.
There is another motive for the pressing of the Civil servants. The loyal oath was not a sufficient test for the Orange administration. A new test had to be invented. Just as Father O'Donnell was persecuted and prosecuted and slandered because he was only loyal to King George and not to Lloyd George, the Civil servants are to be judged by their readiness to serve the Coercionists. Those who refuse will be marked men. But they should not be too anxious. A Government reduced to such straits cannot long survive.
I have read all that article, and I stand by every word of it. I do not think it is an immoderate statement of the case. I will read the other article if the right hon. Gentleman desires it. I admit that the language in the second of these articles is somewhat more violent.

Mr. MACPHERSON: Hear, hear.

Mr. O'CONNOR: If the right hon. Gentleman thinks that will help him to make his case, I will read any passage he desires. I omit all the personal allusions to the right hon. Gentleman himself because he said to-day that any personal attacks on himself did not influence his action. As I accept that statement, I do not go into them, and to be quite frank I do not approve of the tone of the remarks referring to the right hon. Gentleman. I think his is a. foolish and disastrous policy, but I am not going to accompany that by strong personal attacks on himself, as I regard the right hon. Gentleman more as
the unhappy instrument of other stronger men, and as the unfortunate victim of a most vicious system. I will now read the strongest passage in the second article:
Lord French, or, failing him, the Lord Chancellor and the Recorder of Dublin might as well issue a proclamation in proper form prohibiting as an illegal assembly that conjunction of the Planets which is due next week, and, if an American professor is to be believed, will endanger the future of our globe. Obviously. the proceeding is a danger to the public peace. Concerning the mutilation of Archbishop Walsh's letter to Cardinal O'Connell, nothing need be said. His Grace can afford to treat with contempt the paltry malice of the insult. Let the ninnies of officialdom and their maiden aunts tee-hee their satisfaction; let the Orange Press applaud Lord French's truculence, and the Lodges honour his name with Kentish Fire. Much good may it do him and them !
Other details of the programme of carefully prepared exasperation must be placed in a different category.
Then there is an allusion to the motor car Order, on which my right hon. Friend the leader of the Labour Party has had some conversation with the right hon. Gentle-man—
That there is crime in Ireland, crime of the sort that exists in every community and that all communities endeavour to stamp out in self-defence and as a duty, no sane person will deny. It does not lie with England—
I will not read the next pasasge. Undoubtedly in England there has been a good deal of crime which is largely due to that rousing of savage instincts which always comes to humanity after a terrible war, but I should be very sorry to make an indictment of that kind against the law-abiding and just people of England because of these occasional crimes.
But Irish crime is the greatest asset of the English Government in Ireland. It is cherished, nurtured, fostered, and protected under the shadow of Castle rule, in the shelter of that upas tree where nothing can thrive that is not noxious. Crime is not criminal—nay, it may become a virtuous action—when perpetrated by soldiers; that is the new ethical doctrine, or, rather, an old doctrine revived, which must now be accepted by order of authority. How many criminals in or out of uniform, one would like to ask, are well known to the Government, yet are allowed to walk abroad in full confidence that they are immune and safe from justice? Yet, English orators and writers of the baser sort, some of whom sit amongst the mighty, have the audacity to accuse Irishmen of lawlessness and sympathy with crime because we complain about the lawlessness and crimes of their Government in Ireland, as it exhibits itself to our eyes.
I think that is the strongest passage of all. Now, Sir, when this paper says that soldiers have been guilty of crime, I wonder if the House would regard that
accusation as made in the air. I read a list in the "Daily Herald," which on this occasion was quoting from official documents, and I was astounded at the number of assassinations of policemen that had taken place in Ireland. But I well remember that three men and a boy were murdered in Dublin during the Rebellion of 1016, and the officer, who alone was responsible for the murders, was acquitted on the ground of insanity. Within two years of his being found guilty of four murders he was walking the streets of Irish towns, and I am not surprised that the widow of Mr. Sheehy Skeffwgton joined the ranks of Sinn Fein in face of such provocation. If you have coercion you are bound to have these acts of violence by soldiers, and if you have a Goercionist Government it is bound, more or less, to ignore these crimes against the civil population. I have read not only the leading article in the "Freeman's Journal," but I have read the strongest passages in the second article, and I am not shirking any Facts. I put the case to the Government by my own hands, and I make two propositions—that these articles are not beyond the necessities of the ease, and, secondly, and this is even more important, that, allowing for the different methods of expression which are habitual to Englishmen with their more self-restrained temperament and to Irishmen with their more ardent methods of expression, there is not a single statement in these articles in the "Freeman's Journal" that I cannot parallel by similar statements in that great English paper, "The Times." Lord Northcliffe is not the proprietor of a newspaper in Ireland. I do not know what a mild happen to him if he were. I dare say he would have been in gaol by this time had he lived in Ireland. Here is the genesis of all these things. Are all these acts of provocation in Ireland the result of a Machiavellian, I will even say a hellish plot, not uncommon in Irish history, to prevent the settlement of the Irish question and the reconciliation of the English and the Irish peoples. We know all about it in Ireland. We have gone through it before. When Grattan's Parliament could not be destroyed by corruption and by force rebellion was instigated. I remember the day when Mr. Gladstone in one of his deep toned interruptions, when a Unionist speaker of the period was talking of the Rebellion of 1798, and asking who made it, said, "Pitt made it." He was right. That rebellion was made by Pitt and the militarists who ruled Ireland
then. These have always emanated from Dublin Castle as there would if you allowed a militarist Government to be established in this country, the Agents provocateur, the spy, the paid secret agent of the Government, posing as more extreme than the extremist. There have always been these agencies in the employ of despotic Governments, whether they have been in Dublin, London, Petrograd or Warsaw. I will read from the "Times" an assertion with which I am entirely in accord—that there are evidences of a deliberate plot on the part of militarists and ascendancy men to provoke Ireland to outrage, perhaps to rebellion, so that Home Rule and its prospects may be drowned in blood. That is a strong statement, but here is what the "Times" says on that point:
Our fear is this. The Irish Executive are being used, whether with the connivance of members of the Cabinet or not, in order to arouse in Ireland a state of feeling, if not a state of rebellion, in which settlement may become impossible. That there should be a shadow of justification for such a fear is intolerable. The realisation of it would mean treachery not only to the British people but to the honour and credit of the British name throughout the world. We are, therefore, deeply concerned with the present position in Ireland. We see there rival policies where there should be unity; we see drift where there should be construction.…The time has come for the Government to announce their Irish policy. Every day that passes darkens the position, and not in Ireland alone.
I have another passage here from the "Times" newspaper in the same terms. It is an article headed "The Irish Executive," published in the "Times" of 16th December, and it reads:
For some time past we have felt and have recently expressed anxiety in regard to the conduct of Irish affairs by those who exercise the autocratic powers of Irish Government. Events have forced us to the belief that the military regime in Ireland has failed signally in its task of preserving law and order.…It is conceivable that the determination of the Irish Executive to pursue to its utmost limits the present policy of coercion, of which the latest achievement is the suppression of the 'Freeman's Journal,' is so fixed and unalterable that it can count on support or sympathy only from men of a particular bias. If that were so we should regard it as the strongest reason for believing that the Irish Government were heading straight for a disaster which would almost certainly, if not designedly, involve the forthcoming proposals of the Cabinet.
I put it to the House—I have read, I think frankly and as fully as the time at my disposal permits, the comments in the "Freeman's Journal" and those in the "Times" newspaper, and permit me to say that Ireland ought never to forget the inesti-
mable services which the "Times" newspaper is giving to the cause of Ireland and of the Empire in these articles on the Irish question. If only the right hon. Gentleman would listen to the "Times" and not to Dublin Castle he would be in a much better political position than he is to-day. What is the secret of it all? I cannot trace the factors behind the policy of the right hon. Gentleman in suppressing the "Freeman's Journal"; I can only suspect them. The "Times" newspaper asks the question, "Who is the Government of Ireland?" I ask it too. It is not the right hon. Gentleman: he is a puppet. It is not the Attorney-General, a black letter lawyer of complacent speech and great distinction. I am sure he will be relieved when by that due automatic process of elevation to the Bench which follows its course with all law officers he gets back to the pursuit of his profession. Who is the Government of Ireland? Is it Lord French? He is a soldier. Whether at the present moment he enjoys the same fame as he did before he wrote his book I do not pause to say. It is the "Times" newspaper whose correspondent says that the Government of Ireland is in the hands of a certain little ascendancy gang, and we are asked to have respect for a Government in Ireland when Irishmen see, and the people of Ireland see, it exercising at every place and period these repressive laws so vindictively towards political enemies. The "Times" newspaper, through its correspondent, says that the Government of Ireland is in the hands of a certain little ascendancy gang. How can we be asked to have respect for the Government in Ireland and for the law administered by that Government when three-fourths of the people of Ireland see people in every place of power and authority there exercising repressive laws through political vindictiveness? I say nothing about the present Lord Chancellor of Ireland, who was the assessor to the Ulster Provisional Government. The "Times" mentions Sir Frederick Shaw, the Commander-in-chief, and its correspondent also refers to some of the judiciary. I am sure that the Chief Secretary will remember how the present Prime Minister, when he was Secretary of State for War, spoke about the ineptitudes and malignities of the War Office. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman was Under-Secretary at the time.

Mr. MACPHERSON: No.

Mr. O'CONNOR: That was the statement of the Prime Minister. Are the ineptitudes and malignities at an end? Is the Ourragh Camp still entrenched in the War Office? Is Sir Henry Wilson not one of the men who were associated with the right hon. Gentleman opposite in provoking an Irish rebellion? How can you have respect for the English Governmeni in Ireland when those who took part in the rebellion against the people are put into high places to exercise coercion against their political opponents? What does this policy mean? One hon. Gentleman this evening, when I made this Motion, was kind enough to say that we were "murderers" "sympathised with murderers."

Mr. W. THORNE: And I called him a liar, and will do so again.

Mr. O'CONNOR: So I heard my hon. Friend say. But I was rather glad that Mr. Speaker was deaf on one side of his head at that time.

Mr. W. THORNE: I should not have minded if he had heard it.

Mr. O'CONNOR: My statement is, and it is the opinion of nearly everybody in lreland outside this little gang, that the real cause of the horrible and deplorable outbreak of crime in Ireland is the Government and the policy of the Government. There have been more murders since the policy of drastic repression, for which the right lion. Gentleman is the official spokesman in this House, than there ever was before. I remember the historic remark of Mr. Parnell when he was put in Kilmainham Gaol in 1881, "Captain Moonlight will take my place." When he and the other responsible leaders of the Irish people were removed from the control of the Irish movement, it fell into the hands of the extremists. There was more crime during the six months of Mr. Parnell's imprisonment than during any other period of the agitation. In the same way there has been more crime in Ireland since the drastic repression for which the right hon. Gentleman is mainly responsible than ever there was before. I agree that the right hon. Gentleman is only politically responsible for this increase of assassination. I do not call him an assassin for that reason any more than I can be justly called a murderer because
I say that the inevitable result of a oertain policy is the increase of crime. Not only has crime increased, but the detection of crime has diminished. Everybody in Ireland now feels that the wild blows of the Government only increase crime, diminish the detection of crime, and break up the whole fabric of society in Ireland, which, God knows, is already broken up enough! There was a meeting the other day of political friends of the Attorney-General. The Chief Secretary still calls himself a Liberal, while the Attorney-General, I believe, is officially a Unionist. There was a meeting of the landlords of county Clare. Everybody knows there is not a more convinced, vehement, and I might even say bitter, body of Unionists in Ireland than the landlords of Clare, who had to face a very severe ordeal during the land war. The landlords of county Clare the other day met. Every single one of them is a Tory to the last drop of his blood. They declared that the industries of Ireland, by the stopping of fairs and markets, were being ruined, and at the same time they declared that crime was not being diminished or detected.
My complaint against the policy of the Government is, not that it pursues crime, but that it creates crime. Am I speaking of something that has never occurred in any other age or country? I never shook hands with a Nihilist in my life. I never wanted to meet a Nihilist in my life. Nihilists have been received at fashionabie drawing-rooms in London, but have never been received by me. The fact that a Nihilist committed murder did not blind me to the fact that Czarism bred murder and murders, and that until Czarism and all its representatives were destroyed, murder would exist. In the same way, crime in every oppressed country has kept exact step with repression. That is the position in Ireland to-day. It is more lamentable than ever at the present time. The Government have announced a policy for the settlement of the Irish question, and this is the atmosphere they prepare for the calm consideration, let alone the goodwill towards and acceptance of their proposals. Is it an unnatural or illogical deduction from the policy of repression adopted by the Government that they do tot want the atmosphere and they do not want the acceptance of their proposals? Unless they are lunatics, they cannot but See that every such thing as they are doing, like the seizure of the "Freeman's Journal," absolutely makes more difficult,
if not impossible, even the consideration of any proposals they may make for the self-government of Ireland.
What is the effect on the Irish mind1 It is a, suspicious mind, I admit—perhaps morbidly suspicious. God knows, it has plenty of grounds for suspicion, and never more than within the last five weeks. I am in the very place I occupied when my dead Leader, Mr. John Redmond, made his speech in which he pledged the support of the Irish people to the cause of to Allies. I never wavered in my approval and support of Mr. Redmond in that policy. I carried the flag of the Allies into more than one part of the world, and against a great deal of attack by my own countrymen In the part of Great Britain with which I am intimately associated the boys were rushing to the railway stations, each more eager than the other to risk his life and shed his blood for the cause of liberty represented by the flag. In some villages in Lanarkshire every Irish boy in the place went to the Flag without being forced to do so. There was a fair prospect of uniting England and Ireland. The same agencies which are working against peace between England and Ireland to-day were working then. The same agencies were at work seeking to transform affection into hatred. I implore the House to realise the danger of this policy and put an end to the present regime in Ireland and give me some chance of being able to live to see in my time that for which I have worked all my time, namely, the reconciliation of the masses of your people and your country with mine.

9.0 P.M.

Mr. ADAMSON: In associating the Labour party with this question I desire to make it clear that we have no sympathy as a. party with the serious crimes which are being perpetrated in Ireland. At the same time we are strongly of opinion that the frequency with which we resort to a policy of suppression in our methods of government in Ireland has a close connection with the crimes which are perpetrated in that unhappy country. The history of Ireland provides abundant proof that serious crimes are always at the highest point during those periods of repression and coercion. The problem of Irish government is the skeleton in the cupboard of British politics. It arises at the most inconvenient times and is continually cutting across our political issues. The issue of freedom of speech and freedom of the Press raises one of the cardinal principles for which the Labour party
stands. We believe in free speech and freedom for the Press in Ireland or any other part of the United Kingdom. Not only nave you a curtailment of free speech and freedom of the Press by the Defence of the Realm Regulations at present, but unfortunately, we have also a curtailment of industrial freedom in Ireland. I have here a copy of the "Dublin Gazette" in which there is published a Regulation making it necessary for drivers of motor cars to apply to the police for permits to drive motor cars or motor cycles not the property of the applicant. This is a. form of repression to which the motor car drivers has very serious objection. They have made it perfectly clear that they do not object to any form of restriction being imposed upon the owners of those motor cars, but they do not like, as workmen, having restrictions imposed upon them. I understand that the drivers have refused to apply for permits, and are now, to a greater or lesser extent, idle as the result of the publication of this Regulation. Not only are we likely to have industrial trouble in Ireland with regard to this matter so far as the motor car drivers are concerned, but understand the Irish Trade Union Congress is in the course of this week to have this question under consideration, and some of us fear that the result may be a cessation of work throughout the whole industrial system in Ireland. That would be a regrettable incident which would increase our troubles so far as the government of Ireland is concerned. I had an opportunity of introducing a deputation of officials of the Motor Drivers' Trade Union, and this matter was discussed, and they implored the Chief Secretary not to insist on imposing this Regulation. As far as I understand, the right hon. Gentleman persisted, and it may lead to very serious results so far as the industries of Ireland are concerned. I would fain hope that even at this late juncture the Chief Secretary and those responsible for the government of Ireland could see their way to withdraw this Regulation and enable us to have industrial peace in Ireland.
The Labour party are strongly of opinion that to suppress either free speech or freedom of the Press is simply to take the surest method of driving the Irish or any other people who are living under a system of repression to other alternatives which are far more dangerous to stable
government than if her people had freedom to express their opinions regarding. methods of government. The Labour party has always strongly opposed our system of government in Ireland, and in particular the adoption of the policy of repression and coercion. In this we are having support from very influential quarters. The "Times," in a moderately written article this morning, says events have forced them to the belief that the military regime in Ireland has failed signally in the task of preserving law and order. The adoption of this method of government has been a miserable failure in Ireland, as it has been in every country where it has been tried. In the saws article the writer says:
We deplore the fact that the authority of the British name in Ireland has come to rest upon military power, when we believe that it should and might rest upon the maintenance of high principles and unimpeachable justice.
The latter part of that sentence supplies us with what, in my opinion, is an alternative form of government to the one that we seek to impose upon Ireland, which, if adopted, would speedily lead to a different relationship between ourselves and the people of Ireland. I am strongly convinced that what we require is a policy of reconciliation instead of a policy of repression. That is the policy required to. improve our relationship with the people of Ireland. If we want to solve the age-long problem we must give the Irish people a full measure of self-governmept Self-determinations for peoples is one of the principles for which we fought in the recent great War. Does anyone think that the Irish people will be satisfied with anything less than the full application of that principle to Irish government—the principle for which they and we fought and conquered? No, Sir! If we think that we can continue to govern Ireland by measures of repression and coercion, we are simply deceiving ourselves, hiding our head in the sand, and taking the short road to national disaster. We seem to have the opinion that our method of governing Ireland is superior to any method which the Irish people themselves count adopt. No form of government, however good, is a real substitute for self-government. So far as the Labour party is concerned, we stand for self-determination in national life. Consequently, we will do all that we can to assist the Irish people to secure the application of that just and equitable principle in the government of Ireland.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND (Mr. Denis Henry): My right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary has asked me to say a few words on the subject now before the House, and I will try to confine myself as much as possible to the terms of the Motion and the question to which it has reference. The "Freeman's Journal" is a very old-established paper in the city of Dublin, and it has continued for years and years, and during the whole period of the War, without any complaint on the part of the executive Government. But about three weeks ago or thereabouts, as a constitutional paper, it was the subject of a winding-up order, and it has passed into new proprietorship, with the result that we have had to take the step which is complained of, namely, the step of suppressing the newspaper, because it proceeded, for reasons which may suggest themselves to some hon. Members, so far as its publications were concerned, to out-Herod Herod. Accordingly, after two or three publications which were objectionable, an Order was made by the competent military authority, in consultation with the civil authorities, for closing the paper.
Let me tell the House the circumstances out of which that arose. You all remember that during the War you were glad to avail yourselves of the -assistance of private individuals in the capacity of special constables. They did great service. They aided the ordinary police force and contributed to the maintenance of law and order at great personal risk to themselves. Lord French thought, and I think thought rightly, that it would be highly desirable to get the assistance of special constables in Ireland for two reasons—first, in order to give much-needed assistance to that sorely-tried body of men, the Dublin Metropolitan Police, and, secondly, not merely to give them assistance by taking over from them portions of their duties, but to give them the moral support that must always come to a body of men when they feel that amongst the civilian population they are not treated as outcasts. Accordingly, with that view, and that view alone, to bring into the Government as much as he could of the civil element and not of the military element, His Excellency proceeded to ask all loyal persons to join for the purpose of giving assistance, as far as they could, to the Dublin Metropolitan Police. Amongst others, he asked the Civil servants to give what assistance they could, purely as volunteers. The
House will agree with me, I think, that. there was nothing out of the way in asking men who were in Government positions and drawing Government salaries to give such assistance as they could to bring about the object which we all have in view. I do not think there is any hon. Member opposite who is not anxious to see peace and order restored in Ireland. Therefore, they were asked to join in the way I have described.

Mr. CLYNES: Will the right hon. Gentleman make plain what I think is an important point? Is it that the Civil servants were asked to volunteer for service or that because they were Civil servants they were requested to serve in the constabulary?

Mr. HENRY: They were not in any way under the slightest coercion, nor was the request confined to them. It was a request put forward by a solicitor in Dublin, a Mr. Goddard, who had served in the War in a very good position, and who had the misfortune to be arrested during the rebellion by the Sinn Feiners.

Mr. DEVLIN: The chief emergency man in Ireland.

Mr. HENRY: He has to deal with an emergency at the present time, and he is doing his best.

Mr. MacVEAGH: From Kildare Street Club.

Captain REDMOND: We know all about it.

Mr. HENRY: The fact remains that there was no distinction drawn between Civil servants and any other persons. Then this article came out, headed, "The Foreign Executive."

Mr. MacVEAGH: Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly state whether it is a fact that this Circular was sent to the heads of the Government Departments in Dublin with the request that the officials under them should be asked to answer whether they were prepared to serve or not?

Mr. HENRY: The Circular was sent to say that Mr. Goddard had undertaken to organise a police force of volunteers, and that he should have the opportunity he wished to see members of the Government Departments with a view to organising that force. No pressure of any kind or description was put upon members of the
Civil Service to join that force. What was the result? An article in the "Freeman's Journal," at the earliest possible moment, referring to Conscription—an ugly name in Ireland—[An HON. MEMBER: "And anywhere else:"]—and speaking of press gangs or pressed men, and pointing out to the persons concerned that
Those who refuse will be marked men, but they should not be too anxious.
Is that an inducement to recruit, to become a member of the police force? `What does it mean? Is it not a clear dissuasion from taking any part in it? And clearly, by the whole tenour of the article—because you must have regard to the surroundings in which this article is written—it is idle for hon. Members to talk of the freedom of the Press or of speech. In England every man, practically speaking, except the lowest classes of criminal society, is on the side of the law.

Captain REDMOND: Hear, hear !

Mr. HENRY: The hon. Member says, "Hear, hear!"but—

Captain REDMOND: In Ireland it is quite the contrary.

Mr. HENRY: I would remind the hon. Member and those who sit with him of the late which they received at the hands of the Sinn Feiners themselves. Though I have always differed with them and with the other Nationalists who went before them on many subjects, yet no one will deny that in this House, where they sat for years and years, they did good service to Ireland and secured the passing of many important measures. What was their reward when they came in contact with the madmen who are asking not for what the hon. Members in the past suggested—a full measure of Home Rule—but for the establishment of an Irish Republic? Do hon. and right hon. Members opposite wish for an independent republic? I do not think that. any hon. Member opposite will get up and say that he is prepared to set up anindependent republic in Ireland. And, notwithstanding the services of my hon. Friends, when it came to an election seventy-five of them, at least, were swept away. By what force? The forces that are attacking to-day the British Government are those which attacked the Members of the Irish Nationalist party. And what we are seeking to do in Ireland is to preserve peace, and to ensure that people will not be murdered in the streets. What do hon.
Members suggest as an alternative? Are we to step back like cowards and allow the forces that represent the Government of Great Britain and Ireland to be swept away? What cowards my right hon. Friend and myself would be, and what a picture we should present to the House of Commons standing up in our places if we consciously gave way one inch to the forces of disorder, no matter at what risk! If such a course is to be pursued it will have to be pursued by another law officer than me. But so long as I have the honour to represent His Majesty as Attorney-General for Ireland, so long will I, to the best of my ability, try to carry out my duty to try to protect my fellow men from assassination.
What are we to do? Lord French, who after all, in the early days of the War did his part and obtained as he deserved in all stages the praise and recognition of every man in this country—how is he described in this paper? It says:
The Constitution has been destroyed—nothing new in our experience—and D.O.R.A. subsituted in order to maintain a system that is not law, but anarchy, with the Viceroy as much an anarchist as is Lenin or Trotsky in Russia.
That is the sort of language that is written about Lord French, who is the representative of His Majesty in Ireland. The position of affairs in Ireland is not a matter of to-day or yesterday. In 1916 there was an uprising in Dublin which resulted in hundreds of deaths. When you are asked here to deal with the condition of affairs in Dublin on the basis on which you would deal with them in Birmingham or Glasgow—you must have regard to locality, and to the fact that an article of this description may lead to an upheaval under existing conditions that would be in the highest degree disastrous and would result in hundreds of deaths. But there is only one course open to any people who regard their duty. That is to give the fullest protection to those who serve you, to try to the best of your power and ability to enforce the law, and it is not improved, quite the contrary, by publications such as this. Accordingly, I submit that we were fully justified in taking the course that has been taken here of suppressing this paper under the Defence of the Realm Regulation.

Captain REDMOND: Have you got law and order?

Mr. HENRY: Matters have not improved in Ireland since they were passed. I wish we could say so, because—

Captain REDMOND: Why have not they?

Mr. HENRY: Because a society has sprung up in Ireland which does not want self-determination and does not want any form of self-government which you are prepared to give, but is determined on the assassination of every person representing you, especially constables and peace preservers, to try to obtain from you what you will never give—an Irish republic. I put it to the House that the "Freeman's Journal" has taken proceedings against the Executive, and they will have an opportunity of ventilating this in the Law Courts; but articles such as have been written here make the task of anyone dealing with the question of law and. order infinitely more difficult.

Captain W. BENN: I certainly would have expected, when the Chief Secretary did not rise to defend this latest act of the Irish Executive, that we should hear from the right hon. Gentleman who has spoken some defence, some reason to show us, who judge things by our own standard, why the Executive suppressed this copy of the "Freeman's Journal." The hon. Gentleman who proposed the Motion read to the House with great candour the strongest passages from this publication, and it is a very significant thing that the Attorney-General in his reply made no reference to the passages him self.

Mr. HENRY: It is sub judice!

Captain BENN: That is a consideration for the right hon. Gentleman. But I asked the Chief Secretary long before this happy accident of the sub judice to quote to the House the passage to which he took exception and he would not do so. I asked him to circulate for the information of Members the passage to which he took exception, and he would not do so.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I told my hon. Friend that the paper was in the Reading Room.

Captain BENN: I have got the paper. What is the good of telling me to read the paper? What I want to know is the passage to which he took exception. I think that most proper exception could be taken to the title of a paper called the "Freeman" in Ireland. Perhaps the title is an article of sedition. It certainly is a most grotesque contortion of the facts in Ireland. The right hon. Gentleman in
his speech says, "This is our case: We want to get special constables in Ireland," which is a very proper thing to do. "We issue a circular appealing for special constables"—which is a very proper thing to do—"and the 'Freeman's Journal' discourages people from becoming special constables"—which may be a very improper thing to do; but it was not dealing in sedition. Certainly some passages in this copy of the "Freeman's Journal" are of a taste which is beneath contempt. But, after all, there are Courts in which you can bring cases for seditious statements, and in which you can bring actions for criminal libel. Why is it that the right hon. Gentlemea are forced to take this extraordinary action under the Defence of the Realm Aatt That is what we want to know. What is the Defence of the Realm Act? The Defence of the Realm Act is an Act passed by this House and only consented to by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in the face of a foreign enemy. It says in the first Section that there are certain specific powers given to the Executive, without popular control, "during the continuance of the present War" Does anyone assert, apart from technicalities, that the present War is still going on? The Executive were armed with certain powers during the continuance of the present War. The War has been terminated far more than a year, and the complaint made by my hon. Friend behind me is that the Government are using these war powers for a purpose for which they were never intended to be used. What is the real reason that the right hon. Gentleman is always driven to this sort of tyrannical conduct in Ireland? The real reason is that he has not got behind him in the government of Ireland a scintilla of public opinion. We know perfectly well that the right hon. Gentleman, in his speech said that there is a great deal in a policeman feeling that he has the moral support of the public, and, with singular candour, he went on to admit that, whereas in this country we are all all behind the police, in that country there is nobody behind the police.

Mr. MACPHERSON: They run the risk of being shot.

Captain BENN: That is to say, the right hon. Gentleman admits that there is no sanction of public support behind the Administration in Ireland. What a commentary on his resolute Government! What a commentary on his maintenance
of law and order. He says that there is no one here, not even the lowest criminal, who is not behind the Execrative; but in Ireland there is no one behind his Administration. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War (Mr. Churchill) and the polished and practised orators in this House, whenever we get up and protest against this sort of thing, say: "You are supporting murder." One hon. Member, with more candour and certainly with more latitude than is usual in this House, this afternoon charged someone with consorting with murderers, whereupon my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham (Mr. W. Thorne), in Doric fashion rebuked him. Our case is exactly the reverse. We say that step by step with your repression you are producing crime. That is the whole case. You cannot govern white people in the way that you are attempting to govern the Irish.

Mr. MACPHERSON: Did not my hon. and gallant Friend the other day say that it was no crime to refuse to recognise the authority of the King's Court in Ireland?

Captain BENN: No.

Mr. MACPHERSON: it is in the OFFIVAL REPORT.

Captain BENN: I never read the OFFICIAL REPORT, but it is a pleasure that I will give myself. I certainly never said anything of the kind, and if it appears in the OFFICIAL REPORT it is by some 'wren Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would like to read the passage.

Mr. MACPHERSON (reading): Captain Beim: And is it a crime to decline to recognise the authority of the Court?"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 9th December, 1919, col. 1253, Vol. 122.]

Captain BENN: Yes, that is the point. I do not know why we should be dragged off the Debate in which we are engaged.

Mr. MACPHERSON: It is a most material point. Here is an ex-Minister of the Crown who says that it is no crime to refuse to recognise the authority of the king's Court!

Captain BENN: I shall be quite prepared on any suitable occasion to defend what I said, and, to refer to the case in question. It was, if I recollect rightly, a ease where children were being put in gaol because they did not recognise the
Courts. Even if I am, according to the right hon. Gentleman, an enemy of the law, there will be a proper opportunity for debating it, and perhaps I shall hive some oportunity of defending myself, but it is perfectly obvious that it has nothing to do with the Motion that we are discussing to-night. Our case and our contention is that step by step with repress on in Ireland the right hon. Gentleman produces these outbursts of violence. He proclaims certain areas, and then he proclaims the whole of the institution. Next he institutes a curfew. Sixty-three Members of this House—I think that is right— have been through his hands as criminals. The other day the Mansion House in Dublin was raided and a number of people were deported. Nobody knows yet what charges are going to made against them. Motor orders, prison orders—every single step that the right hon. Gentleman takes saying that he is trying to maintain law and order, merely produces another outburst of this kind, which we deplore and condemn, and which we have never failed to deplore and condemn in the most round terms. Why should we be charged with consorting with these people? We want to see these people absolutely driven out of Ireland, but the right hon Gentleman is encouraging and creating them. The fact of the matter is, that many people in Ireland believe that the policy of the Executive is to make a settlement impossible by creating so much bitterness. If that be so, and that is the opinion, at any rate, of the "Times," there is no language that I can use which is severe enough in its condemnation.
What is the reason that there is no. public opinion behind the administration of law and order in Ireland? It is because of the character of the administration of law and order. The right hon. Gentleman, in his policy of "thorough," does not catch the criminals whom everybody wants to be caught. The people that be gets are little girls selling flags, who are sentenced to five days in Mountjoy Prison, and little boys who whistle derisively at the police. Those are the people that he catches in his net, and the man who shoots somebody escapes. Is it to be wondered that this sort of contemptible futility is something against which the good sense of all people in Ireland and not in Ireland alone, revolts? My hon. Friend and the right hon. Gentleman read out passages from the "Freeman's Journal" on account of which the
plant has been taken away and the enterprise has been suppressed. The material loss of the newspaper is not of so much importance as the stamping out of the liberty of the Press. When people in Ireland see these people with their offices shut and their enterprise ruined, they remember the speeches that have been made by the Leader of this House (Mr. Bonar Law) and by the right hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Sir E. Carson). The "Freeman's Journal" says,
Special constables are invited to be enrolled. We advise people not to enrol. If they do, they will be marked men.

Mr. MacVEAGH: No. The Attorney-General, I am sure unintentionally, completely misrepresented the article which appeared in the "Freeman's Journal" They did not state that those who join the police force will be marked men, but that those who do not join will be marked men by the Government. That is a very different thing.

Captain BENN: I beg my hon. Friend's pardon. In any case, they said that there would be a differentiation between the people who obeyed this Circular and those who did not. That is the statement that is complained of, and that is the reason that the paper is suppressed. Here is a right hon. and learned Gentleman who announces in this country, "I am going to Ireland to break every law of the land," and he is at the back of the Government. That is what he said. I will quote the passage:
After what happened the other day in the House of Commons (the pronouncement of the policy of the Government in relation to Ulster) he intended when he went over there to break every law that was possible.
That is the right hon. Gentleman. He is not suppressed. I will quote now from the Lord Chancellor. I cannot go higher than that. The Lord Chancellor said,
I place on record my view that, supposing the Government gave such an Order—
that is, an order for the coercion of Ulster—
the consequence can only be described in the words of Mr. Bonar Law, when he said that if they did so it would not be a matter of argument, but the population of London would lynch them to the lamp posts.

Major O'NEILL: Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman reading from the OFFICIAL REPORT?

Captain BENN: I have no reason to question the accuracy of the report.

Sir E. CARSON: I agree that my words were perfectly accurate.

Mr. WATERSON: If it had been anybody else he would have been in prison.

Sir E. CARSON: Why did not they send me there?

Mr. DEVLIN: I was against imprisoning you.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Whitley): I have allowed as much latitude as possible. We have really got rather far away from the point.

Captain BENN: In obedience to your ruling, I shall come straight back to the argument I intended to put forward. When you see a great public newspaper suppressed for something for which in this country it could not have been touched, and when you see the Leader of the House using such language as that I have quoted, and when men see the Leader of the House, the head of a great party, untouched by the law, how can you wonder that the people in Ireland will not give a snap of the fingers for the law? They regard it as simply an institution for imposing on their country things which they hate and a policy which they despise. What is the right hon. Gentleman going to do? He says we must maintain law and order; that the Sinn Fein organisation is a criminal organisation and must be suppressed. I observe that an Archbishop sent —100 to the Sinn Feiners. Little girls have been sent to prison for selling Sinn Fein flags. Is the right hon. Gentleman going to prosecute the Archbishop? The situation is impossible. The right hon. Gentleman has driven every section of society in Ireland, including Unionists, into a solid phalanx against his administration. That is what he is doing by measures such as this. In this country the Press and the public sometimes criticise the Executive, but the Press and the public and the Executive are solidly united in support of the administration of the law. In Ireland the very opposite is the case. The War has put this country back 200 years in its opinions and in its state of progress. What Fox said many years ago is true to-day:
If you cannot govern Ireland by love, you should not govern it by force.

Mr. JELLETT: I need hardly say that I have listened to the discussion to-night with very considerable interest, but not with much surprise. If the Motion means
anything, it means that the article in the "Freeman's Journal" is a justifiable article, and that the Government had no ground to suppress it. The broader issues I do not wish to trouble the House with, because the learned Attorney-General has already dealt with them. But I do think that the House should have some idea of the class of newspaper with which we are dealing. We have had portions of these articles read to the House. I will read one portion which has not been quoted. It is not a pleasant class of literature, but for anyone who wants the entire attitude of this paper disclosed I do not think it ought to be passed over. I find in the article this reference to the Chief Secretary for Ireland:
He was Parliamentary Secretary to the War Office and was the conduit for conveying official answers to inquisitive Members of the House of Commons. Not being fastidious about his job, however dirty. he also made himself responsible for the adaptation of the French brothel system to the requirements of the British warriors in France, and managed the business with such success that when answering a Mr. peto, M.P., on 5th February, 1918, he confessed that his had memory would not enable him to deny that from 40,000 to 50,000 were in hospital at any one time suffering from a loathsome disease. No wonder that his colleagues came to the conclusion that he was the proper man to be the Chief Secretary for Ireland, and to be associated with Lord French in the government of this country. A place more fitting for his talents might be that of boots in one of the tolerated houses. Of such stuff are our rulers made and decent Irishmen are asked to feign respect for the unrespectable.
I think I know something about decent Irishmen. I should be very interested to see what their views would be on reading such language as that. I take the liberty of saying that there is not a decent Irishman, or Irish woman for that, who would not read that language with loathing and disgust. We have had tonight the usual references to coercion. Whenever the law is enforced in Ireland it is called coercion. Apparently the idea of some right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite is that there should be no law in Ireland at all, or that whatever law existed should exist only for the purpose of being defied. Of course, you cannot have any civilised country without law and all law is coercion. It is perfectly true to say that there is coercion in Ireland, but what is the coercion? It is the kind of coercion that we never hear condemned from the benches opposite. It is the kind of coercion that has its sanction in the bullet of the
assassin and in the knife of the murderer. It is the kind of coercion which terrorises men, prevents them from going about their daily avocations, injures their property, and destroys their live stock.

Captain REDMOND: It does not. terrorise me, anyhow.

Mr. MacVEAGH: Where in the War were you? Like Macpherson, you stayed at home.

HON. MEMBERS: Why did not you go?

Mr. JELLETT: Nine-tenths of Irishmen are living under a system of organised terrorism. That is the real coercion. We look and wait in vain for one single word of condemnation or one single word of sympathy with the widows and orphans of murdered policemen. I suppose the reason why we have not got any kind of sympathy from that quarter is because, as those of us who have spent our lives in Ireland and know something of the past history of that country and of the past history of movements of this kind know, the man who breaks the law is always the man who has been applauded, and the man who has tried to enforce the law and to prevent crime has always been the man who has been held up to public odium. There is nothing new about it. The right hon. Gentleman who is now responsible for the government of Ireland. I am glad to say. knows his duty and is determined to do it. I have heard it stated more than once to-night that it is the repression of crime that causes crime. I should rather have thought that unless there was crime to repress there would be no necessity for repression. What would hon. Members have done if they had been in control of affairs in Ireland in April, 1916? Would they have sat quiet and folded their hands, or would they have made any attempt to put down that rebellion?

Mr. DEVLIN: Which rebellion?

Captain REDMOND: The Ulster rebellion.

Mr. JELLETT: I am rather surprised to-find that the hon. Member opposite does. not appear to have heard of the rebellion of April, 1916. I should have thought most. hon. Members opposite would have known. something about it.

Mr. DEVLIN: I was not quite sure to what rebellion you were referring—whether the rebellion of Mr. De Valera or of Sir Edward Carson.

Mr. JELLETT: I mentioned the year 1916, and in that way I thought there should be no possibility of mistake. The point I wish to make is this: We have been told to-night that repression of crime is wrong, and that if you repress crime you create it. If hon. Members had charge of affairs in April, 1916, when that rebellion occurred, what would they have done? They would have done nothing, because their argument amounts to this, that if you endeavour to repress crime you only produce more. I do not desire to detain the House very much longer, because I think the House has probably come to the conclusion that they have had enough of this discussion. I have heard the word "liberty" mentioned more than once tonight. We know a good deal about liberty in Ireland. What we have suffered from in Ireland in the past is not for want of liberty, but too much of it. The liberty that some hon. Members would like to see operative in Ireland is what other people would call licence, and that is what anyone who has the real interest of Ireland at heart is opposed to, tooth and nail.
What is the meaning of the whole of this discussion? Hon. Members opposite know perfectly well. This particular day was allocated to the discussion of a measure of vast importance to the interests of Ireland. Steadily the House has been occupied discussing the question as to whether language such as I have read should be suppressed or not. It is difficult to believe that hon. Members opposite can have the real interests of Ireland at heart when they are satisfied and content to block a measure of vital importance to the future of Ireland and its progress by raising a discussion like this. They did not even stop there. I heard hon. Members this afternoon rise and discuss every conceivable question with which they had no interest or concern. I listened with a considerable amount of amazement to the sympathetic observations made about Lord Rosebery's farm. I listened also to the discussion about, aeroplanes, somewhere in Cairo, and anything at all so long as you could stop a real remedial and beneficial measure for Ireland. I take the liberty of saying that the interests of Ireland are as dear to me as to any Gentleman on the opposite benches, but I take a different
view of what are the real interests of Ireland from what they do. I look upon that Bill which we ought to have been discussing as one of the greatest measures introduced in my time in connection with Ireland. I hope that we shall hear no more of the side issues with which we haw been side-tracked to-night, and which are of no importance and with no substance in them, and which show that those who raised them do not know and do not care to see where the real interests of Ireland are. I trust and believe that this House will take a higher and nobler view of the. interests of Ireland, and will recognime that the action of the Chief Secretary, which is being criticised to-night, was the action of a man who knows his duty and is determined to do it.

10.0 P.M.

Mr. DEVLIN: I should not have interrupted the hon. and learned Gentleman who has just spoken had I been aware that this was his first appearance in the House. I thought that his face was familiar to me, and that I had seen him before, but I was mistaken. I congratulate him on his speech, and I trust that we will have many contributions of that character in our future Debates, and I do. so because I think that speeches of that character are bound to be of an immeasurable service to the other side. He has just stated in the closing portion of his speech that nine-tenths of the people of Ireland are living in a state of terror. Will he tell us where they are? Does he live in a state of terror? The. hon. and learned Gentleman is a very well-known public man, and though he is not known in this House we know all aboat him. He has been one of the most violent rhetoricians on public platforms in Ireland. He lives in the centre, in the capital, of Ireland. He lives amongst people who differ from him in religion and in politics, and yet he has never lost an opportunity of not only slandering his. own race, and the people amongst whom he lives, but even when there was some desire amongst Orangemen and Protestants in the North for peace and contentment amongst the different and divided classes, his was the voice that was always heard against union or co-operation. Now, when he comes here and delivers a funeral oration over the condition of Ireland, it is well for the House of Commons to know that this is not a young Member coming in here with generous sympathies for the cause of liberty, animated by an
instinct of glorious devotion to the cause of order, but that he is a known and seasoned partisan who has learnt his lessons of abuse of Ireland in the weltering school of rhetoricians which he adorns.
He has lectured us upon the fact that we do not denounce murder. He rather suggested that we are in favour of murder. That suggestion has been made. Will it be made openly and frankly by anybody? Will any Member on these benches say that any representative of Irish opinion returned to this House belonging to our party is in favour of murder or ever was in favour of murder, or ever said a word in favour of murder? No, we have not; but there are men in this House who have advocated murder. There have been men in this House who have pleaded that public men in England should be murdered, and I will tell you who they are. Here is a speech by an hon. and learned Gentleman from the North of Ireland, delivered in a place called Hayle. Hail, lovely morn! [HON. MEMBERS: "Smiling morn!"] Yes, smiling morn; I was in a doleful mood when I rose. The orator from the North of Ireland said
The Radical Press is talking a great deal at the present time about the right of free speech. [A voice: Long live Winston Churchill.]
This was at the time when Winston dared, in the name of law and order, to come over to the city of Belfast. He had proclaimed his intention, as a free-born Briton, a lover of order, a believer in law, and he said, "As an upholder of law and order I will go over to Belfast and make a speech"; and so, when the learned orator from the North of Ireland went to Hayle, he said, "The Radical Press is talking a great deal at the present time about the right of free speech," and when the voice shouted "Long live Winston Churchill," he replied, "I do not know whether, if he gets to Belfast, he will live long when he gets there." There is no doubt about it, if ever there was an incitement to murder, that was it. [Laughter.] Why does the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland not look solemn? Why should the murder of Winston Churchill cause all this merriment? Winston Churchill—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]—The right hon. Gentleman—I am back again to order now, and I will be as orderly as possible—the right hon. Gentleman the Minister for War occupies precisely the same position towards us now that he occupied towards
you then. He was your enemy then, he is not our friend now. What would the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland do if I went down to Hayle? The Conservative Press, or it might be the Radical Press, because one never knows where one is in these times—for one would never have expected that a sturdy Radical from the Catholic parts of Scotland would have borne the mantle of "Buckshot" Forster thirty years after the attempt to suppress the Land League—but supposing the Radical Press, or the Tory Press, or the Coalition Press, or any sort of mixed Press, or even the "Freeman's Journal," said, "If he comes to Dublin, say, if he ever gets there, he will not live long," that would be an approval of murder, and I would not like to see Churchill murdered. I think it would be an outrage on the gaiety of nations. It would almost be as great a tragedy as the disappearance of President Wilson's Fourteen Points, and yet, if you murder a policeman—and I feel profoundly for these policemen and regret it deeply; I feel for these men tremendously—the Empire shakes to its foundations, but if you murder 10.0 P.M. Winston Churchill, the whole Ministerial Bench laughs five years after the event was adumbrated.
That only shows you the ever-changing mentality of the gentlemen of England. One day you are a rebel, the next day you are a judge. You are dressed up as a galloper on horseback in a rebellion four years ago, you are dressed up slow in all the magnificent vestments of a Lord Chancellor. You become the legal adviser to a provisional government set up in rebellion against the authority of His Majesty five years ago, to-day you sit on the Woolsack; and there you talk about law, and there you ask us to respect your institutions. I do not complain about the attitude of these gentlemen. I do not complain about them being rebellious. I think everybody is right who is a rebel in Ireland, whether air is the right hon. Gentleman or myself. Nobody in Ireland could be anything but a rebel, because all things there are all wrong, and to be a rebel is to be the only real thing that counts in the country, and therefore, I was against the arrest of the right bon. Gentleman. I heard at the time about all the preparations that were made, how they had a gunboat in Belfast Lough. Was that the reason you wanted to murder him? He was then First Lord of the Admiralty. What was the gunboat there for? I said When I was told about this that I did not approve of the blowing up of Belfast.
No, Sir, not one of you was ever arrested for preaching treason, for mutiny in the Army, for war upon fellow citizens, peaceful and law abiding, for disloyalty to the Sovereign. There was not a single hair on the head of one of you hurt in this transaction, and I think it is a mean and an unchivalrous thing that Ulster rebels, who themselves were never assailed, whom we never called upon the Government to attack, to arrest or to imprison, should lend themselves, openly and silently, to this policy of carrying on a war against everybody who thinks that his country is a nation, and that he has the right to manage its own affairs and for that rebels, when you yourselves did precisely the same thing, because you thought your country was not a nation, and do not belong to any country, but want to be associated with this one. That is my complaint, that there is no real, generous allowance made for excesses in Ireland by men who have passed through all these stages themselves, and who have never a generous word or a generous thought for the difficulties and trials of a nation in the agonies of its conflict, or even a generous sentiment for men dike ourselves who are here, the last remnant of constitutional government in Ireland, who declared their sympathy with your cause, and whose countrymen made sacrifices for the honour of your Empire and the glory of your arms. What, then, is all this discussion about to-night? I admit it is a comparatively trifling incident. The strange thing is that it is only on these comparatively trifling incidents that we have ever an opportunity of coming here and speaking for our country. The Chief Secretary for Ireland imagines he has no function in fife but to put down crime. He is somehow a Minister who bas taken the wrong turning.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I have tried to introduce a really good, social, construetive measure to-day.

Mr. DEVLIN: What do you want with an Education Bill, this splendid piece of craftsmanship and statesmanship? I am as anxious to debate that Bill as the right hon. Gentleman, but I am not going to have this Bill pushed through the House by a trick. That is my position. The Prime Minister on that bench stated that he did not intend to bring in that Bill this Session.

Mr. MACPHERSON: No; he did not.

Mr. DEVLIN: The right hon. Gentleman has contradicted me, but I will prove
I am right. When the Prime Minister was reciting at the Table the different items of business that were to be transacted in the House, the Education Bill was never mentioned. The Home Rule Bill was mentioned and was dropped, and the Education Bill was put in. If he had announced that on such-and-such a day—that this day—we would have the Education Bill, I should have been perfectly prepared to discuss it and argue it; but I say it was put in by a trick, and, therefore the right hon. Gentleman is quite wrong in saying that anyone is trying to take any unfair advantage of his desire to propose this Education Bill in the House. I come back to my point. The right hon. Gentleman does not know, and has never sought to know, any opinion about Ireland outside Belfast. That is why he has never got a proper grip of the situation in Ireland. There are other places as well as Belfast. I say that profoundly and respectfully, although I am a Member for Belfast myself. I am quite willing to admit that it is the hub of the universe, but there are other places, and the rest of Ireland constitutes the other places. You think here in this country that we are ruled by England. Not at all; we are ruled by Ulster. Ulster cracks the whip, and the Chief Secretary jumps. There never was such a strange anomaly, such an extraordinary condition of affairs, as that this country is held up to—the ridicule and contempt of civilised humanity in every part of the world for the things you do in Ireland, and you think you are doing them, but you are not doing them at all. Believe me, you are not the tyrants you imagine you are You are simply the agents, with your Imperial forces and power behind you, of these Gentlemen from the North of Ireland who tell you what you are to do with these wretched and contemptible Southerners, and then it is done.
At this point a man in the Strangers' Gallery made an interruption, and was directed by the attendants to withdraw.

Mr. DEVLIN (continuing): The right hon. Gentleman is going to give us a. great measure in the shape of an Education Bill. Why does he want to give us an Education Bill? As a matter of fact, Ireland is infinitely better educated now than she was in the days of the Land League. We have the educational and intellectual progress of nearly thirty years. What a commentary upon your
Government and your Administration, that the more you educate the Irish people the more rebellious they become! The right hon. Gentleman will admit that Ireland was never in as bad a condition, or at least for thirty years, as now, and yet in the interests of the Empire he is attempting to carry an education measure for Ireland to make people understand things better, and therefore more rebellious than ever. I listened to the speech of the learned Attorney-General, in which he stated that the "Freeman's Journal" was a paper that, up to three or four weeks ago, was conducted on lines of constitutional policy, but has ceased to adopt that attitude. I think he said it was wound up in bankruptcy. What was the "Freeman's Journal"? It was one of the most magnificent papers in the whole of Europe at one time. [Laughter] Yes it was. It was owned and controlled by Mr. Edward O'Dwyer Grey, one of the most brilliant journalists in the world. It was a paper which for thirty years joined the members of the Irish Parliamentary party in what has now turned out to be a hopeless propaganda for a holier and better, a larger and sweeter arrangement between the democracies of these countries and the Irish race throughout the world. It rendered mighty service in the time of war. For fourteen or fifteen years it helped to keep in power the Liberal party, of which the right hon. Gentleman is such a distinguished ornament. Was that the boast made by my right hon. and learned Friend when he said that this constitutional policy had disappeared? Is not that, then, your own handiwork? You destroyed the party. You ruined the party. You destroyed the paper. What do you get in its stead? Recitals of murders, armoured cars, aeroplanes, tanks, bombs for policemen, reprisals for the poor men who are called upon to discharge these duties under these circumstances. A refusal to allow the Mansion House, which is the centre of civic dignity, of power, of authority, to be used for a sale at Christmas of articles advertising Irish industries; the imprisonment of people for the pettiest and smallest offences. No law: I admit it! No order: I admit it!
What is the conclusion to be drawn from it all? Finally, the whole Irish problem is to be solved by the appearance of Mr. Norris Goddard, who is to take charge of the organisation and recruiting of a civil police. If I am not mistaken, Mr. Norris
Goddard was one of the leading members of the Dublin Recruiting Committee. I will tell the House what the Dublin Recruiting Committee was. It was made up of a number of old people who constituted themselves a recruiting committee in time of War. Sir Hedley Le Bas went over as representing the War Office and the Government to try to help recruiting in Ireland. He went to this recruiting committee. In his discussions with various eminent people gathered at the meeting. here is what he heard: "We do not want recruits in Ireland; it will be far better if these Nationalists do not join." That is not, mark you, coming from me. That is the declared and open statement of Sir Medley Le Bas, who has never been so far as Ireland before and who went over on this particular occasion. This was the sort of performance that was carried on at recruiting meetings in Dublin. Those concerned did not want the Nationalists to join the Army, because it might lead to Home Rule! Mr. Norris Goddard is charged with the function of organising a special police force for the purpose of safeguarding the Empire. They did not want the Nationalists and Papists to help in the winning of the War!
I come to the last point, which is this: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the suppression of papers will ultimately do any good? Why does he not do what they would do in England? Why does he not prosecute a paper before a. proper tribunal as would be done in this country? The difficulty with people in Ireland who are constitutionalists is that they cannot defend anything you do. What has happened to the constitutional force is this, they are being driven day by day and week by week into the Sinn Fein camp, or they have to remain silent. You may go on with it, you may proceed on these lines, and you may carry out this policy, but has it ever struck the right hon. Gentleman, or anybody else associated with him, to ask to where is all this going to lead? Imagine anybody having any faith in a Government that proclaims as this Government did last week a dual policy, one introducing a Home Rule Bill, so-called that is, to divide Ireland in two, and before you do that you are to pass an Education Bill which is to consolidate and unify and centralise the education of the country you are going to divide in two. There is a spectacle, and I ask the House
to mark it. May I ask the Minister of Education what is to be thought of the Goverment of which he is a member that proclaims its intention, if the papers speak rightly, of introducing a Home Rule Bill which proposes to divide Ireland in two, and before it is introduced they are to submit another Bill dealing with education, which is to centralise educational machinery and unify and consolidate all the educational forces of the country.
Which policy is it? Is it division or union? Is it the division of National Ireland or the unification of National Ireland? It is this kind of thing that makes the government of Ireland contemptible, and nobody has a good word to say for it. The world is gasping for some solution that will end this problem. It does not make any odds to Dublin Castle as to the future, but it is sonic odds to those who think that the future of humanity and mankind is concerned, for there is not a branch of life in any English-speaking country that is not made or unmade by this Irish problem, which, instead of sweetening the lives of communities, is poisoning every well-spring of good, and this will go on so long as this problem remains unsolved. Suppressed newspapers disappear for a day, but they spring up to-morrow, and suppressed organisations will spring up again. You may suppress fairs, you may destroy trade, and you may ruin everything, but they will come up again. This is all part and payee] of the policy of crushing National sentiment, let it take whatever form it may, and you may continue Chief Secretaries and governments as well, but there it will remain.

Major O'NEILL: The hon. Gentleman who has just sat down has made, as he always does, an amusing and towards the end a very eloquent speech. He has covered a wide ground. He has covered the whole Irish question, and he has gone, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, far beyond the terms upon which this Motion was framed. This is a Motion protesting against the suppression of a newspaper. Out of it has arisen a general discussion on the whole Irish policy of the Government, and, indeed, the whole Irish question. The "Freeman's Journal" was suppressed the other day. It was not the first newspaper in Ireland to be suppressed; it is not the first in Ireland which has been suppresed during the last few months. Why is it that this the first occasion in this Parliament
upon which there has been a Motion protesting against the suppression of a newspaper

Mr. DEVLIN: At the time the "Belfast Evening Telegraph" was suppressed I made a speech against it.

Captain REDMOND: And when a paper which attacked me in my own Constituency was suppressed I protested also against such action.

Major O'NEILL: But has there been any occasion on which the Adjournment of the House has been moved on the question of the suppression of an Irish paper in this Parliament before this? No; and what is the explanation? I do not wish to suggest that the hon. Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool is not deeply moved by the events that have taken place in Ireland, or that he is not deeply concerned for the suppression of a newspaper which for years past has eloquently advocated the cause which he supports. But I cannot conceal from myself the fact that this Motion follows a line of conduct on the part of the Nationalist party in the House of Commons to-day which has taught Members of this Parliament their first experience in the arts of Parliamentary obstruction. The Irish Education Bill, which has been referred to already, was to have come on for Second Reading to-day. The Air Force Votes, which, in the ordinary course, so far as the English Members were concerned, would have been passed in a few minutes, were fought line by line. Every Vote was divided against, and with very few exceptions the only Members who took part in the Debate were hon. Members who are responsible for the Motion we are now discussing.

Mr. DEVLIN: Forty millions sterling was involved.

Major O'NEILL: Can any hon. Member fail to connect the two? It must be obvious to anyone who can see his own nose that there has been a concerted policy on the part of hon. Members opposite to prevent at any cost and any sacrifice a Second Reading discussion on the Irish Education Bill this afternoon. And what are they doing in preventing that Bill becoming law? Although the Chief Secretary—and I give him credit for having passed in this Parliament more measures of real benefit to the Irish people than have been passed in any previous
Parliament for many years, measures dealing with housing and other matters of vital importance to the lives and homes of the people of Ireland—here to-day we were to come to the most important of all Bills, and the Irish Education Bill, had it been carried would have for the first time in the history of Irish education have introduced some small element of popular control into the education of Ireland. Yet hon. Gentlemen opposite have come down and used their great arts of obstruction to prevent even the discussion of that Bill here. The result is that hundreds of Irish teachers—poorly underpaid—mere underpaid, perhaps than any other profession in the United Kingdom—will be deprived of the increase of salaries which was their due.

Captain REDMOND: Why could they not get their money without the Bill?

Major O'NEILL: Fifteen thousand school children in Belfast to-day are walking the streets without accommodation in which to learn how to read and write, and there are thousands also in Dublin. They are being deprived of their schools and their education by the non-passage of this Bill as a result of the action of hon. Gentlemen opposite this afternoon. Then they come down and move this Motion to-night about the "Freeman's Journal" and its suppression. The hon. Member for the Falls Division (Mr. Devlin) made numerous references to the Secretary of State for War. He said that the right hon. Gentleman used to be the enemy of my right hon. Friend (Sir E. Carson) and those on this Bench.

Mr. DEVLIN: The hon. and gallant Gentleman has referred to my obstruction and to the speeches I delivered on the Air Ministry Votes. Is he aware of the fact that altogether I did not speak for fifteen minutes in the four hours, and that the Minister for War himself spoke for about two hours?

Major O'NEILL: I apologise to the hon. Gentleman. I was not in the House for a very long time during the Debate this afternoon, but there was one thing with which I was struck—I was greatly surprised at it—that was that the hon. Gentleman himself appeared to be hopelessly bad at obstruction.

Mr. DEVLIN: I plead guilty.

Major O'NEILL: The hon. Gentleman behind the hon. Member (Mr. E. Kelly) was a master-mind compared with himself. The hon. Member for the Falls Division never has been an obstructionist, and does not understand the art.

Mr. KELLY: Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman accuse me of not being bond fide in the points I brought before the House?

Major O'NEILL: I make no accusation against the hon. Member. He has sat in this House, at any rate during this Parliament, and I do not remember him referring with the great interest and the great knowledge he displayed to-day to any questions connected with aeroplanes or hangars, or the work and cost of the Air Ministry. However, I will pass from that subject to say something on the main issues we have been discussing. The hon. and gallant Member fur Leith (Captain W. Benn) said that not a scintilla of public opinion in Ireland is behind the action of the Chief Secretary. Let him not forget that in Ireland there is a public opinion which is determined to see that the action of the Chief Secretary in enforcing regard for the law is properly supported.

Mr. DEVLIN: In the South?

Major O'NEILL: There is a public opinion in the North, and there is also a large but silent public opinion in the South to that effect. The hon. Gentleman knows it as well as I do. I intervene in this Debate primarily as an Irish Unionist to say we feel that the Chief Secretary is carrying out his most difficult and trying task with the support of a large section of opinion in all parts of Ireland.
The Leader of the Labour party spoke in favour of the Motion. I was much struck by the difference between his speech and that of the hon. Member (Mr. O'Connor). The hon. Member discoursed upon the past wrongs of Ireland. He worked himself up into a feeling of tension and passion upon occasion when referring to the Rebellion in 1798 and other tragic episodes in the long and sad history of Ireland. But the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Adamson) was quite different. He talked about Labour, and something about motor-car licences, and the discontent of Labour at motor-car restrictions. It was altogether an extraordinary fall from a high plane to a lower, and yet much more sensible and common-sense plane. But he dealt with the question
apart from all the frills and draperies with which we are accustomed to find it clothed. But he did not propose any remedy. He talked about self-determination in Ireland. What does he mean by that? Would he give them independence? That is the self-determination the South and West of Ireland are asking for to-day. Would he give Ulster self-determination? When Labour Members have been asked what their alternative is they have generally answered by saying, "Put Home Rule into force at once;" W hat Home Rule?

Captain REDMOND: The Home Rule Act of 1914.

Major O'NEILL: Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman think the Act of 1914 is possible or feasible? Is it not universally admitted that it would be utterly impossible to-day? It is not only impossible because it would not in any degree satisfy the demands of Ireland. but because it was passed six years ago when conditions were entirely different and when many of the provisions, such as the financial provisions, the franchise provisions—

Captain REDMOND: The Home Rule Act expressly provided that when the contingency came about which has now arrived the whole question of the financial terms should be revised.

Major O'NEILL: That only supports my argument and shows that it has broken down. But I have learnt one thing, and that is that there are certainly six people, some of whom generally live in Ireland, who are in favour of the Home Rule Act of 1914 and would like to see it put into operation to-day. It is quite obvious that hon. Gentlemen, when they talk about the Home Rule Act being put into operation, speak for nobody but themselves. They are but six. It is known to all hon. Members that if you ask the people in Ireland who are asking to-day for independence and self-determination whether they would be satisfied with the Home Rule Act of 1914, that no such Act would come within miles of satisfying the sentiments which inspire them to-day. His Majesty's Government have a difficult task. I do not like coercion. I do not suppose there is a man in this House, on whatever side he sits or whatever part of the country he represents, who likes to see the state of affairs which is now in existence in
the South and West of Ireland. I do plore it as much as anybody. I deplore the fact that there is necessity for the keeping of thousands of soldiers in Ireland, but so long as the party who are asking for independence in Ireland back up their demands by these extreme measures of assassination and murder, which have disgraced the annals of Ireland in the last few years, I feel perfectly certain that the British House of Commons, representing as it does a nation and an Empire which was not and would not be intimidated by the Germans, will ask for self-determination or self-government with far less likelihood of success. The only chance of any settlement of rite Irish question, either now or in the near future—a settlement which, heaven knows, all of us, and hon. Members from Ulster more than anybody, would be only too thankful to see brought about—is that the people of Ireland who to-day are going in for this extreme policy of Sinn Fein, with the terrible concomitants of murder and outrage, should realise that the British Empire is not to be intimidated. Then it may be possible that some settlement may eventually mature.

Sir M. DOCKRELL: I did not Want to intervene in this Debate, but a matter was mentioned by the hon. Member for the Falls Division (Mr. Devlin), and I am sure that he dues not want to misrepresent me or those who were associated with me. He referred to the Recruiting Committee in Dublin as a body of old gentlemen. I happened to be the chairman of that committee of old gentlemen. He mentioned Mr. Norris Goddard had been associated with that committee. I want to correct him in that. Mr. Goddard took no active part on that committee.

Mr. DEVLIN: He did not help recruiting.

Sir M. DOCKRELL: He was not on that Committee and had nothing to do with it. As regards Sir Hedley Le Bas, his visit was prompted by his anxiety to introduce to the Recruiting Committee in Dublin his famous posters, and I as chairman, and the other gentlemen on that committee, who, at least, knew Ireland as well as Sir Hedley Le Bits, told him that the posters he was producing were utterly unsuitable for Dublin or for Ireland. You must distinguish between the city of Dublin Recruiting Committee, which lasted four years and took a serious part in recruiting,
and the Irish Recruiting Council. I was myself on the Irish Recruiting Council, which only lasted a very short time. Sir Hedley Le Bas introduced these posters into Dublin, and we absolutely disavowed any responsibility whatever for the asinine proceedings which accompanied the production of those posters, and the position in which they were placed.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member must confine himself to the question of the Freeman's Journal."

Sir M. COCKRELL: I simply want to correct a misapprehension. I did not wish to interrupt the proceedings. Hence I did not rise on the point of Order. If, for one moment, I may illustrate what I have said as to the position in which those posters were placed—

Mr. SPEAKER: If the hon. Member wishes to continue his speech he must turn his attention to the subject-matter of this Debate, namely, the suppression of the "Freeman's Journal."

Sir M. DOCKRELL: Would it be relevant in your judgment to introduce a reference to those proceedings? we have been charged with having been mixed up with certain gentlemen with reference to posters in Ireland.

Mr. SPEAKER: Will the hon. Gentleman tell us something about the "Freeman's Journal"?

Sir M. DOCKRELL: On the general question—

Captain REDMOND: It is close to eleven o'clock, and the Chief Secretary, who is the chief Minister of the Irish Government in this House, has not considered this matter of sufficient importance to rise in his place and defend the action of the Government. The question at issue is a very serious one. It is all very well for the Chief Secretary to delegate to the Attorney-General for Ireland the task of replying to the case made against the suppression of the "Freeman's Journal," but he is the Minister responsible for Ireland, and it is his duty, and I would almost say that it is to his honour, to get up and defend the action of his Government and their advisers under which the "Freeman's Journal" has been suppressed. The "Freeman's Journal" has been a great national Irish democratic journal for the last fifty or
hundred years in Ireland. It supported the party to which the right hon. Gentleman belonged until recently—I do not know to what party he belongs now—and it was a great outspoken organ of public opinion in Ireland. It was an organ of opinion which told the Irish people and the English people that they should come together and that there was the possibility, the probability, of them uniting for the mutual betterment and the further improvement of the two peoples. What is the result? I do not blame the Chief Secretary. No man could fill the position of Chief Secretary for Ireland to-day with success. The position is untenable; it is impossible. The Irish people will not have a Chief Secretary there. They say that they should govern themselves. The result is that the Chief Secretaryship is an impossibility. The present Chief Secretary thinks that he is doing well by suppressing the rising national spirit and manhood of Ireland. What is the result? Instead of having law and order in Ireland, instead of having a peaceful country, the right hon. Gentleman himself acknowledges that things are going from bad to worse from day to day. Why is it? The more you endeavour to repress the spirit of a nation, the more will that spirit rise up, and the more will it live. Therefore, you are increasing and not decreasing the national spirit of manhood of our country by your policy of suppression and coercion. The Leader of the Labour party at the commencement of this Debate referred to the question of the Motor Order in Ireland. I raised that question myself only a week ago. I asked the Chief Secretary whether he intended pursuing the matter to its final end. He said that he did. The result was that within a few hours, I think twenty-four, though perhaps it was forty-eight, the order was withdrawn, at least in regard to a portion of the traffic in Ireland. Why cannot the Irish Government deal straightforwardly and honestly with the Irish people? Why cannot they come and say, "We are going to do a certain thing and we intend to do it"? Instead of that, they try and enforce an Order which would not be tolerated in this country. You have had very disagreeable murders in this country. You had one at Leeds and you had one here in London only a. few days ago. They were brought about largely through the operations of motor vehicles. The assassins drove up to the banks, they went into the banks and committed
murder, and off they went in their motor-ears. Are you going to introduce the motor permit system into England? If this is the United Kingdom, and we are all supposed to be governed under the same system, why, if motor permits are enforced in Ireland, are they not to be enforced in this country? This is only one example of the differential treatment accorded to the two countries. I was very pleased that the Chief Secretary did not speak to-night, because I feel that he knows in his inmost heart, as one who was a Radical and a supporter of self-government, that he could not have defended the action of the Castle authorities in Ireland. Furthermore, I hope in the next few hours to see an announcement made in the Press that he is to continue this state of affairs no longer, and that he has decided to resign his position as Chief Secretary for Ireland.

Lieut. -Commander WILLIAMS: We have had a very curious and very typical Irish Debate. The speech with which it

was opened was one of those orations which we all admire for its intensity and for its volume of language. The hon. Member went over the history of the last 100 years. He brought out various facts and various troubles which have afflicted the Irish people and, incidentally, the English people. What some of us would like to see is some process whereby the Irish people would form in their own minds a scheme for the solution of this problem. To-day we have had a remnant of the Nationalist party, with some past history in the art of obstruction, doing their best to help forward the Irish race—

Mr. T. P. O'CONNOR: rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
Question, "That the Question be now put," put, and agreed to.
Question put accordingly, "That this House do now adjourn."

The House divided: Ayes, 52; Noes, 161.

Division No. 162.]
AYES.
[11.0 p.m.


Acland, Rt. Hon. Francis Dyke
Herbert, Col. Hon. A. (Yeovil)
Short, A. (Wednesbury)


Bell, James (Ormskirk)
Hirst, G. H.
Sitch, C. H.


Benn, Captain W. (Leith)
Holmes, J. Stanley
Swan, J. E. C.


Briant, F.
Irving, Dan
Thomson, T. (Middlesbrough, W.)


Bromfield, W.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Thorne, G. R. (Wolvsrhampton)


Cairns, John
Kelly, Edward J. (Donegal, E.)
Thorne, W. (Plaistow)


Cape, Tom
Kiley, James Daniel
Tootill, Robert


carter, W. (Mansfield)
Lawson. John
Wallace, J.


Davies, Alfred (Clitheroe)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Walsh, S. (Ince, Lancs.)


Devlin, Joseph
Maclean, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (Mldlothian)
Waterson, A. E.


Edwards, C. (Bedwellty)
MacVeagh, Jeremiah
Williams, A. (Consett, Durham)


Elliot, Captain W. E. (Lanark)
Murray, Dr. D. (Western Isles)
Williams, Col. P. (Middlesbrough)


Entwistle, Major C. F.
Onions, Alfred
Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)


Graham, W. (Edinburgh)
Parkinson, John Alfen (Wlgan)
Wood, Major Mackenzle (Aberdeen, C.)


Guest, J. (Hemsworth, York)
Redmond, Captain William A.
Young, Robert (Newton, Lancs.)


Hall. F. (York Normanton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton)



Harbison, T. J. S.
Rose, Frank H.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES—


Hayday, A.
Royce, William Stapleton
Mr. T. P. O'Connor, and Mr. Adamson.


Henderson, RT' Hon. Arthur (Widnes)




NOES.


Adair, Rear-Admiral
Burn, T. H. (Belfast)
Gardiner, J. (Perth and Kinross)


Agg-Gardner, Sir James Tynte
Butcher, Sir J. G.
Geddes, Rt. Hon. Sir A. C. (Bas'gstoke)


Allen, Lt.-Col. William James
Campion, Colonel W. R.
Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham


Archdale, Edward M.
Carr, W. T.
Gilbert, James Daniel


Archer-Shee Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Casey, T. W.
Gilmour, Lieut.-Colonel John


Astbury, Lleut.-Com. F. W.
Cayzer, Major H. R.
Goff, Sir Park


Atkey, A. R.
Cecil, Rt. Hon. E. (Aston Manor)
Goulding, Rt. Hon. Sir E. A.


Balrd, John Lawrence
Cockerill, Brig. -General G. K.
Grant, James Augustus


Baldwin, Stanley
Coote, Colln R. (Isle of Ely)
Greame, Major P. Lloyd


Balfour, Sir Robert (Partick)
Cope, Major W. (Glamorgan)
Greene, Lt.-Col. W. (Hackney, N.)


Barlow, Sir Montague (Salford, S.)
Cory, Sir Clifford John (St. Ives)
Guinness, Lt.-Col. Hn. W. E. (B. St. E)


Barnett, Major R, W.
Craig, Captain Charles C. (Antrim)
Hacking, Colonel D. H.


Barnston, Major H.
Davldson, Major-General Sir John H.
Hailwood, A.


Barton, Sir William (Oldham)
Davies, T. (Cirencester)
Hambro, Angus Valdemar


Benn, Com. Ian Hamilton (Greenwich)
Dixon, Captain H.
Hanna, G. B.


Bigland, Alfred
Dockrell, Sir M.
Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.)


Blake, Sir Francis Douglas
Edge, Captain William
Herbert, Denniss (Hertford)


Bowyer, G. W. E.
Eyres-Monsell, Commander B. M.
Hewart, Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon


Breese, Major C. E.
Falcon, Captain M.
Higham, C. F (Islington, S.)


Bridgeman, William Clive
Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Hilder, Lt.-Colonel F.


Briggs, Harold
Forestier-Walker, L.
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy


Brcwn. Captain D. C. (Hexham)
Foxcroft, Captain C.
Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William J.
Fraser, Major Sir Keith
Hope, John Deans (Berwick)


Burdon, Colonel Rowland
Ganzoni, Captain F. C.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Hopkinson, Austin (Mossley)
Mosley, Oswald
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. (Preston)


Howard, Major S. G.
Mount, William Arthur
Stanton, Charles Butt


Hunter, Gen. Sir Archibald (Lancaster)
Munro, Rt. Hon. Robert
Stephenson, Colonel H. K.


Hurd, P.A
Murray, Hen. G. (St. Rollox)
Stewart, Gershom


Jephcott, A. R.
Murray, John (Leeds, W.)
Sturrock, J. Leng-


Jellett, William Morgan
Murray, William (Dumfries)
Sugden, Lieut. W. H.


Johnson, L. S.
Neal, Arthur
Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempstead)


Jonas, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. (Exeter)
Terrell, Capt. R. (Henley, Oxford)


Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen)
Oman, C. W. C.
Thorpe, J. H.


Kerr-Smiley, Major P.
O'Neill, Captain Hon. Robert W. H.
Tryon, Major George Clement


Kidd, James
Palmer, Brig.-Gen. G. (Westbury)
Vickers, D.


Law, A. J. (Rochdale)
Parry, Lt.-Colonel Thomas Henry
Waddington, R.


Lewis, T. A. (Pontypridd, Glam.)
Perkins, Walter Frank
Wardle, George J.


Lindsay, William Arthur
Pinkham, Lt.-Colonel Charles
Waring, Major Walter


Lister, Sir R. Ashton
Pollock, Sir Ernest M.
Wheler, Colonel Granville C. H.


Lonsdale, James R.
Pratt, John William
Whitia, Sir William


Lynn, R. J.
Purchase, H. G.
Wigan, Brig.-Gen. John Tyson


M'Guffln, Samuel
Raeburn, Sir William
Williams, Lt.-Com, C. (Tavistock)


M'Lean, Lt-Col. C. W. W. (Brigg)
Raw, Lt.-Colonel Dr. N.
Willoughby, Lt.-Col. Hon. Claud


Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Reid, D. D.
Wills, Lt.-Col. Sir Gilbert Alan H.


Mallalieu, Frederick William
Robinson S. (Brecon and Radnor)
Wilson, Capt. A. Stanley (Hold'ness)


Malone, Major P. (Tottenham)
Rodger, A. K.
Wilson, Colonel Leslie (Reading)


Matthews, David
Roundell, Colonel R. F.
Wood, Major Hon. E. (Ripon)


Middlebrook, Sir William
Samuel, S. (WandswoHh, Putney)
Wood, Sir J. (Stalybridge and Hyde)


Moles, Thomas
Sanders, Colonel Robert Arthur
Worsfold, T. Cato


Molson, Major John Elsdale
Sassoon, Sir Philip A. G. D.
Yeo, Sir Alfred William


Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Cot. J. T. C.
Seager, Sir William
Young, Lt.-Com. E. H. (Norwich)


Morden, Colonel H. Grant
Shortt, Rt. Hon. E. (N'castle-on-T., W.)



Morison, T. B. (Inverness)
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, S.)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.— Captain


Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.
Stanier, Captain Sir Beville
Guest and Lord E. Talbot


Question put, and agreed to.

Orders of the Day — MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to—

Aliens Restriction Bill, with Amendments.

That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to make Amendments with respect to the constitution and endowments of the foundation of the Military Knights of Windsor," [Military Knights of Windsor Bill [Lords]

Orders of the Day — ALIENS RESTRICTION BILL.

Lords Amendments to he considered To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 245.]

Orders of the Day — MILITARY KNIGHTS OF WINDSOR BILL [Lords]

Read the first time; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 246.]

Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 22nd October, proposed the Question, "That this House do now adjourn."

Adjourned accordingly at Eight minutes after Eleven of the clock.